[PATCH v2 4/5] btrfs: fix the ram_bytes assignment for truncated ordered extents

[Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>]

[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>
---
 fs/btrfs/inode.c | 4 +---
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
index d6c43120c5d3..45f77ae8963f 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
@@ -3018,10 +3018,8 @@ static int insert_ordered_extent_file_extent(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
 	btrfs_set_stack_file_extent_disk_num_bytes(&stack_fi,
 						   oe->disk_num_bytes);
 	btrfs_set_stack_file_extent_offset(&stack_fi, oe->offset);
-	if (test_bit(BTRFS_ORDERED_TRUNCATED, &oe->flags)) {
+	if (test_bit(BTRFS_ORDERED_TRUNCATED, &oe->flags))
 		num_bytes = oe->truncated_len;
-		ram_bytes = num_bytes;
-	}
 	btrfs_set_stack_file_extent_num_bytes(&stack_fi, num_bytes);
 	btrfs_set_stack_file_extent_ram_bytes(&stack_fi, ram_bytes);
 	btrfs_set_stack_file_extent_compression(&stack_fi, oe->compress_type);
-- 
2.45.2