On 08/12/2013 05:19, Ingo Weinhold wrote: > On 12/08/2013 01:46 AM, revol@xxxxxxx wrote: >> 664e3fb: Partially revert 24d0e21f51e88ab35cc3f1c1750741dfeb40933d >> >> This reverts the extra for loop condition from >> "do_iterative_fd_io_iterate(): Support sparse files". >> >> When reading a file with more than 8 block_runs, get_vecs() would >> return B_BUFFER_OVERFLOW which would never create any subrequest due >> to the test on error == B_OK on the loop, but instead just fail. > > The correct fix would be to reset error to B_OK, if get_vecs() returned > B_BUFFER_OVERFLOW. > >> Except for the get_vecs() return code, where it is not wanted, >> the test made no sense as all other assignments are tested directly >> or passed around with break. > > That is not correct. In the inner loop request->CreateSubRequest() can > fail and it wouldn't necessarily break out of the outer loop. Hmm right, never code at 3am... François.