btrfs: fix abort logic in btrfs_replace_file_extents

Error injection testing uncovered a case where we'd end up with a
corrupt file system with a missing extent in the middle of a file.  This
occurs because the if statement to decide if we should abort is wrong.

The only way we would abort in this case is if we got a ret !=
-EOPNOTSUPP and we called from the file clone code.  However the
prealloc code uses this path too.  Instead we need to abort if there is
an error, and the only error we _don't_ abort on is -EOPNOTSUPP and only
if we came from the clone file code.

CC: [email protected] # 5.10+
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]>

Author: josefbacik

fs/btrfs/file.c

@@ -2703,14 +2703,16 @@ int btrfs_replace_file_extents(struct btrfs_inode *inode,
 						 drop_args.bytes_found);
 		if (ret != -ENOSPC) {
 			/*
-			 * When cloning we want to avoid transaction aborts when
-			 * nothing was done and we are attempting to clone parts
-			 * of inline extents, in such cases -EOPNOTSUPP is
-			 * returned by __btrfs_drop_extents() without having
-			 * changed anything in the file.
+			 * The only time we don't want to abort is if we are
+			 * attempting to clone a partial inline extent, in which
+			 * case we'll get EOPNOTSUPP.  However if we aren't
+			 * clone we need to abort no matter what, because if we
+			 * got EOPNOTSUPP via prealloc then we messed up and
+			 * need to abort.
 			 */
-			if (extent_info && !extent_info->is_new_extent &&
-			    ret && ret != -EOPNOTSUPP)
+			if (ret &&
+			    (ret != -EOPNOTSUPP ||
+			     (extent_info && extent_info->is_new_extent)))
 				btrfs_abort_transaction(trans, ret);
 			break;
 		}