From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Woodhouse Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFS support for btrfs - v2 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:49:12 +0100 Message-ID: <1219157352.3184.481.camel@pmac.infradead.org> References: <200807210201.56690.balajirrao@gmail.com> <200808171821.43874.balajirrao@gmail.com> <1218977763.3184.288.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <200808171854.14275.balajirrao@gmail.com> <1218980439.3184.304.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1219087412.14063.22.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> <1219088029.3184.413.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1219088859.14063.35.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> <1219090839.3184.436.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1219091550.14063.44.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> <1219096342.3184.453.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1219146885.14063.54.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Balaji Rao , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org To: Chris Mason Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1219146885.14063.54.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> List-ID: On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 07:54 -0400, Chris Mason wrote: > > > What if the parent inode actually _is_ inode #0xffffffffffffffff? Can > > that happen? In that case it would return zero, and I shouldn't subtract > > 1 from the slot number -- I've actually found what I'm looking for? > > > > The max inode will be 2^64 - 1 Which is what we're searching for -- so it's _possible_, albeit vanishingly unlikely, that btrfs_search_slot() will actually return zero, having found precisely what we wanted? And in that case, path->slots[0] being zero is fine. And we shouldn't be subtracting one from it to find the slot we want? -- David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre David.Woodhouse@intel.com Intel Corporation