Commit 0885ef5b authored by Josef Bacik's avatar Josef Bacik

Btrfs: do not do filemap_write_and_wait_range in fsync

We already do the btrfs_wait_ordered_range which will do this for us, so
just remove this call so we don't call it twice.  Thanks,
Signed-off-by: default avatarJosef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>
parent 551ebb2d
...@@ -1497,14 +1497,15 @@ int btrfs_sync_file(struct file *file, loff_t start, loff_t end, int datasync) ...@@ -1497,14 +1497,15 @@ int btrfs_sync_file(struct file *file, loff_t start, loff_t end, int datasync)
trace_btrfs_sync_file(file, datasync); trace_btrfs_sync_file(file, datasync);
ret = filemap_write_and_wait_range(inode->i_mapping, start, end);
if (ret)
return ret;
mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex); mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex);
/* we wait first, since the writeback may change the inode */ /*
* we wait first, since the writeback may change the inode, also wait
* ordered range does a filemape_write_and_wait_range which is why we
* don't do it above like other file systems.
*/
root->log_batch++; root->log_batch++;
btrfs_wait_ordered_range(inode, 0, (u64)-1); btrfs_wait_ordered_range(inode, start, end);
root->log_batch++; root->log_batch++;
/* /*
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment