Curt Wohlgemuth wrote:
> This fixes a bug in which new blocks returned from an extent created with
> ext4_ext_zeroout() can have dirty metadata still associated with them.
Do you have a testcase or at least end result details for this corruption?
> Signed-off-by: Curt Wohlgemuth <curtw@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> This is for the problem I reported on 23 Nov ("Bug in extent zeroout: blocks
> not marked as new"). I'm not seeing the corruption with this fix that I was
> seeing without it.
>
> diff -uprN orig/fs/ext4/extents.c new/fs/ext4/extents.c
> --- orig/fs/ext4/extents.c 2009-12-09 15:09:25.000000000 -0800
> +++ new/fs/ext4/extents.c 2009-12-09 15:09:37.000000000 -0800
> @@ -2474,9 +2474,21 @@ static int ext4_ext_zeroout(struct inode
> submit_bio(WRITE, bio);
> wait_for_completion(&event);
>
> - if (test_bit(BIO_UPTODATE, &bio->bi_flags))
> + /* On success, we need to insure all metadata associated
nitpick, "ensure" I think, although I guess they're mostly synonymous
today so do with that what you will :)
-Eric
> + * with each of these blocks is unmapped. */
> + if (test_bit(BIO_UPTODATE, &bio->bi_flags)) {
> + sector_t block = ee_pblock;
> +
> ret = 0;
> - else {
> + done = 0;
> + while (done < len) {
> + unmap_underlying_metadata(inode->i_sb->s_bdev,
> + block);
> +
> + done++;
> + block++;
> + }
> + } else {
> ret = -EIO;
> break;
> }
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
