Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 04 May 2011 15:33:28 -0400 | From | Josef Bacik <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2 v2] fs: add SEEK_HOLE and SEEK_DATA flags |
| |
On 05/04/2011 03:31 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > On Wed, 04 May 2011 13:58:39 EDT, Josef Bacik said: > >> +#define SEEK_HOLE 3 /* seek to the closest hole */ >> +#define SEEK_DATA 4 /* seek to the closest data */ > > Comments here need nearest/next fixing as well - otherwise the ext[34] crew may > actually implement the commented semantics. ;) >
Balls, thanks I'll fix that.
> Other than that, patch 1/2 looks OK to me (not that there's much code to > review), and 2/2 *seems* sane and implement the "next" semantics, though I only > examined the while/if structure and am assuming the btrfs innards are done > correctly. In particular, that 'while (1)' looks like it can be painful for a > sufficiently large and fragmented file (think a gigabyte file in 4K chunks, > producing a million extents), but I'll let a btrfs expert analyse that > performance issue ;) >
Heh well we do while (1) in btrfs _everywhere_, so this isn't anything new, tho I should probably throw a cond_resched() in there. Thanks,
Josef
| |