> > > --- a/fs/exfat/file.c
> > > +++ b/fs/exfat/file.c
> > > @@ -625,7 +625,7 @@ static ssize_t exfat_file_write_iter(struct kiocb *iocb,
> > > struct iov_iter *iter)
> > >
> > > if (iocb_is_dsync(iocb) && iocb->ki_pos > pos) {
> > > ssize_t err = vfs_fsync_range(file, pos, iocb->ki_pos - 1,
> > > - iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_SYNC);
> > > + (iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_SYNC) ? 0 : 1);
> >
> > How about calling generic_write_sync() instead of vfs_fsync_range(), like in
> > generic_file_write_iter()?
> The second arg of vfs_fsync_range "pos" maybe changed by valid_size (if pos > valid_size).
> It can not replace by iocb->ki_pos - ret (ret by __generic_file_write_iter).
> So current way maybe better.
Here we synchronize the areas written by exfat_extend_valid_size() and
__generic_file_write_iter() if valid_size < pos.
The lengths of these two write areas are 'pos-valid_size' and 'ret'.
We can use generic_write_sync() and pass it the sum of these two lengths.
Of course, regardless of whether valid_size < pos, exfat_file_write_iter() only
needs to return the length written by __generic_file_write_iter().
