btrfs: fix the ram_bytes assignment for truncated ordered extents
[HICCUP] After adding extra checks on btrfs_file_extent_item::ram_bytes to tree-checker, running fsstress leads to tree-checker warning at write time, as we created file extent items with an invalid ram_bytes. All those offending file extents have offset 0, and ram_bytes matching num_bytes, and smaller than disk_num_bytes. This would also trigger the recently enhanced btrfs-check, which catches such mismatches and report them as minor errors. [CAUSE] When a folio/page is invalidated and it is part of a submitted OE, we mark the OE truncated just to the beginning of the folio/page. And for truncated OE, we insert the file extent item with incorrect value for ram_bytes (using num_bytes instead of the usual value). This is not a big deal for end users, as we do not utilize the ram_bytes field for regular non-compressed extents. This mismatch is just a small violation against on-disk format. [FIX] Fix it by removing the override on btrfs_file_extent_item::ram_bytes. Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment