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...@oracle.com>
---
fs/ocfs2/alloc.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/alloc.c b/fs/ocfs2/alloc.c
index 54ff4c7..fcffc54 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,
--
1.5.4.GIT
_______________________________________________
Ocfs2-devel mailing list
Ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com
http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel
