From 2c2acd2d193595f2919583fd6e32b09ca8e85e94 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Christoph Hellwig Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 07:54:47 -0800 Subject: 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 Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- fs/ntfs/mft.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/ntfs/mft.c b/fs/ntfs/mft.c index 2831f495a674..32c523cf5a2d 100644 --- a/fs/ntfs/mft.c +++ b/fs/ntfs/mft.c @@ -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 " -- cgit v1.2.3-59-g8ed1b