On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 05:25:01PM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> No user of it in the iomap code at the moment, but we should not
> actively report wrong information if we can trivially get it right.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c | 7 ++++---
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c
> index d19f99e5476a..bbc5d2e06b06 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c
> @@ -541,7 +541,7 @@ xfs_file_iomap_begin_delay(
> struct xfs_bmbt_irec imap, cmap;
> struct xfs_iext_cursor icur, ccur;
> xfs_fsblock_t prealloc_blocks = 0;
> - bool eof = false, cow_eof = false, shared;
> + bool eof = false, cow_eof = false, shared = false;
> int whichfork = XFS_DATA_FORK;
> int error = 0;
>
> @@ -709,13 +709,14 @@ xfs_file_iomap_begin_delay(
> if (imap.br_startoff > offset_fsb) {
> xfs_trim_extent(&cmap, offset_fsb,
> imap.br_startoff - offset_fsb);
> - error = xfs_bmbt_to_iomap(ip, iomap, &cmap, false);
> + error = xfs_bmbt_to_iomap(ip, iomap, &cmap, true);
Does this belong in the previous patch? (Maybe all of it?)
--D
> goto out_unlock;
> }
> /* ensure we only report blocks we have a reservation for */
> xfs_trim_extent(&imap, cmap.br_startoff, cmap.br_blockcount);
> + shared = true;
> }
> - error = xfs_bmbt_to_iomap(ip, iomap, &imap, false);
> + error = xfs_bmbt_to_iomap(ip, iomap, &imap, shared);
> out_unlock:
> xfs_iunlock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL);
> return error;
> --
> 2.19.1
>
