On 07/17/2012 03:18 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 03:15:56PM +0800, Jeff Liu wrote:
>> This is v3 of the patch.
>> We can trigger BUG() in xfs_seek_data() if met two unwritten without data or
>> hole extents at last version.
>> So making the extents map reading in loop could solve it.
>> Sorry, Am not yet try the repeated holes scenario according to Dave's
>> comments as lack of X64 test env, still
>> waiting for it ready. But this patch is already too long delayed, I have
>> worked it out one weeks ago.
>> So I'd like to post it because of it could handle repeated hole/unwritten
>> extents well in a loop, and I also improved
>> xfstests:286 with those cases for the verification, will post it soon.
>> Tested by Mark, hit BUG() for continuous unwritten extents without data
>> * xfs_seek_data(), remove BUG() and having extents map search in loop.
> The patch looks good. But as question by Mark I wonder if it's a good
> idea to just improve xfs_seek_data, but not xfs_seek_hole.
I definitely would like to improve it.