btrfs: account for non-CoW'd blocks in btrfs_abort_transaction

The test for !trans->blocks_used in btrfs_abort_transaction is
insufficient to determine whether it's safe to drop the transaction
handle on the floor.  btrfs_cow_block, informed by should_cow_block,
can return blocks that have already been CoW'd in the current
transaction.  trans->blocks_used is only incremented for new block
allocations. If an operation overlaps the blocks in the current
transaction entirely and must abort the transaction, we'll happily
let it clean up the trans handle even though it may have modified
the blocks and will commit an incomplete operation.

In the long-term, I'd like to do closer tracking of when the fs
is actually modified so we can still recover as gracefully as possible,
but that approach will need some discussion.  In the short term,
since this is the only code using trans->blocks_used, let's just
switch it to a bool indicating whether any blocks were used and set
it when should_cow_block returns false.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 3.4+
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

1 files changed, 4 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
index 827c949fa4bc..6276add8538a 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
@@ -1554,6 +1554,7 @@ noinline int btrfs_cow_block(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
 		       trans->transid, root->fs_info->generation);
 
 	if (!should_cow_block(trans, root, buf)) {
+		trans->dirty = true;
 		*cow_ret = buf;
 		return 0;
 	}
@@ -2777,8 +2778,10 @@ again:
 			 * then we don't want to set the path blocking,
 			 * so we test it here
 			 */
-			if (!should_cow_block(trans, root, b))
+			if (!should_cow_block(trans, root, b)) {
+				trans->dirty = true;
 				goto cow_done;
+			}
 
 			/*
 			 * must have write locks on this node and the