[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170612152523.785707253@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 17:25:10 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: [PATCH 4.11 103/150] ufs_extend_tail(): fix the braino in calling conventions of ufs_new_fragments()
4.11-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
commit 940ef1a0ed939c2ca029fca715e25e7778ce1e34 upstream.
... and it really needs splitting into "new" and "extend" cases, but that's for
later
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
fs/ufs/inode.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/fs/ufs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/ufs/inode.c
@@ -235,7 +235,8 @@ ufs_extend_tail(struct inode *inode, u64
p = ufs_get_direct_data_ptr(uspi, ufsi, block);
tmp = ufs_new_fragments(inode, p, lastfrag, ufs_data_ptr_to_cpu(sb, p),
- new_size, err, locked_page);
+ new_size - (lastfrag & uspi->s_fpbmask), err,
+ locked_page);
return tmp != 0;
}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists