[PATCH 2/2] xfs: don't unconditionally clear the reflink flag on zero-block files

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



If we have speculative cow preallocations hanging around in the cow
fork, don't let a truncate operation clear the reflink flag because if
we do then there's a chance we'll forget to free those extents when we
destroy the incore inode.

Reported-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
 fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c |    8 +++++---
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
index 5599dda..4ec5b7f 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
@@ -1624,10 +1624,12 @@ xfs_itruncate_extents(
 		goto out;
 
 	/*
-	 * Clear the reflink flag if we truncated everything.
+	 * Clear the reflink flag if there are no data fork blocks and
+	 * there are no extents staged in the cow fork.
 	 */
-	if (ip->i_d.di_nblocks == 0 && xfs_is_reflink_inode(ip)) {
-		ip->i_d.di_flags2 &= ~XFS_DIFLAG2_REFLINK;
+	if (xfs_is_reflink_inode(ip) && ip->i_cnextents == 0) {
+		if (ip->i_d.di_nblocks == 0)
+			ip->i_d.di_flags2 &= ~XFS_DIFLAG2_REFLINK;
 		xfs_inode_clear_cowblocks_tag(ip);
 	}
 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [XFS Filesystem Development (older mail)]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux