ocfs2: Access and dirty the buffer_head in mark_written.
In __ocfs2_mark_extent_written, when we meet with the situation
of c_split_covers_rec, the old solution just replace the extent
record and forget to access and dirty the buffer_head. This will
cause a problem when the unwritten extent is in an extent block.
So access and dirty it.
Signed-off-by: Tao Ma <tao.ma@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.com>
diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/alloc.c b/fs/ocfs2/alloc.c
index 60fe74035..3a9e5de 100644
--- a/fs/ocfs2/alloc.c
+++ b/fs/ocfs2/alloc.c
@@ -4796,6 +4796,29 @@
return ret;
}
+static int ocfs2_replace_extent_rec(struct inode *inode,
+ handle_t *handle,
+ struct ocfs2_path *path,
+ struct ocfs2_extent_list *el,
+ int split_index,
+ struct ocfs2_extent_rec *split_rec)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = ocfs2_path_bh_journal_access(handle, inode, path,
+ path_num_items(path) - 1);
+ if (ret) {
+ mlog_errno(ret);
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ el->l_recs[split_index] = *split_rec;
+
+ ocfs2_journal_dirty(handle, path_leaf_bh(path));
+out:
+ return ret;
+}
+
/*
* Mark part or all of the extent record at split_index in the leaf
* pointed to by path as written. This removes the unwritten
@@ -4885,7 +4908,9 @@
if (ctxt.c_contig_type == CONTIG_NONE) {
if (ctxt.c_split_covers_rec)
- el->l_recs[split_index] = *split_rec;
+ ret = ocfs2_replace_extent_rec(inode, handle,
+ path, el,
+ split_index, split_rec);
else
ret = ocfs2_split_and_insert(inode, handle, path, et,
&last_eb_bh, split_index,