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:
parent
937d330512
commit
2c2acd2d19
|
@ -381,7 +381,7 @@ unm_err_out:
|
|||
* 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 "
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue