p71924506
/
linux_old1
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

ntfs: fix bogus __mark_inode_dirty(I_DIRTY_SYNC | I_DIRTY_DATASYNC) call 

I_DIRTY_DATASYNC is a strict superset of I_DIRTY_SYNC semantics, as
in mark dirty to be written out by fdatasync as well.  So dirtying
for both flags makes no sense.

Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
This commit is contained in:
Christoph Hellwig 2018-02-21 07:54:47 -08:00 committed by Al Viro
parent 937d330512
commit 2c2acd2d19
1 changed files with 2 additions and 2 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

4
fs/ntfs/mft.c
View File

@ -381,7 +381,7 @@ MFT_RECORD *map_extent_mft_record(ntfs_inode *base_ni, MFT_REF mref,
* vfs inode dirty. This ensures that any changes to the mft record are
* written out to disk.
*
* NOTE: We only set I_DIRTY_SYNC and I_DIRTY_DATASYNC (and not I_DIRTY_PAGES)
* NOTE: We only set I_DIRTY_DATASYNC (and not I_DIRTY_PAGES)
* on the base vfs inode, because even though file data may have been modified,
* it is dirty in the inode meta data rather than the data page cache of the
* inode, and thus there are no data pages that need writing out. Therefore, a
@ -407,7 +407,7 @@ void __mark_mft_record_dirty(ntfs_inode *ni)
else
base_ni = ni->ext.base_ntfs_ino;
mutex_unlock(&ni->extent_lock);
__mark_inode_dirty(VFS_I(base_ni), I_DIRTY_SYNC | I_DIRTY_DATASYNC);
__mark_inode_dirty(VFS_I(base_ni), I_DIRTY_DATASYNC);
}
static const char *ntfs_please_email = "Please email "