From 47be12e4eec84c1846f29af64fe25a396b57a026 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tao Ma Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 07:32:48 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] 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 Signed-off-by: Mark Fasheh --- fs/ocfs2/alloc.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/alloc.c b/fs/ocfs2/alloc.c index 60fe74035db5..3a9e5deed74d 100644 --- a/fs/ocfs2/alloc.c +++ b/fs/ocfs2/alloc.c @@ -4796,6 +4796,29 @@ out: 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 @@ static int __ocfs2_mark_extent_written(struct inode *inode, 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, -- 2.20.1