Re: [PATCH][RESEND] btrfs: fix search key advancing condition

2015-07-31 Thread Filipe David Manana
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 3:25 AM, Naohiro Aota wrote: > The search key advancing condition used in copy_to_sk() is loose. It can > advance the key even if it reaches sk->max_*: e.g. when the max key = (512, > 1024, -1) and the current key = (512, 1025, 10), it increments the > offset by 1, continue

Re: [PATCH][RESEND] btrfs: fix search key advancing condition

2015-07-29 Thread Naohiro Aota
Hello, list. Could any one take a look at on this? I believe this is a issue slowing down ioctl(BTRFS_IOC_TREE_SEARCH) if the target key is missing. On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Naohiro Aota wrote: > The search key advancing condition used in copy_to_sk() is loose. It can > advance the key

[PATCH][RESEND] btrfs: fix search key advancing condition

2015-06-29 Thread Naohiro Aota
The search key advancing condition used in copy_to_sk() is loose. It can advance the key even if it reaches sk->max_*: e.g. when the max key = (512, 1024, -1) and the current key = (512, 1025, 10), it increments the offset by 1, continues hopeless search from (512, 1025, 11). This issue make ioctl(