After an ordered extent completes, don't blindly reset the
inode's ordered tree last accessed ordered extent pointer.

While running the xfstests I noticed that about 29% of the
time the ordered extent to which tree->last pointed was not
the same as our just completed ordered extent. After that I
ran the following sysbench test (after a prepare phase) and
noticed that about 68% of the time tree->last pointed to
a different ordered extent too.

sysbench --test=fileio --file-num=32 --file-total-size=4G \
    --file-test-mode=rndwr --num-threads=512 \
    --file-block-size=32768 --max-time=60 --max-requests=0 run

Therefore reset tree->last on ordered extent removal only if
it pointed to the ordered extent we're removing from the tree.

Results from 4 runs of the following test before and after
applying this patch:

$ sysbench --test=fileio --file-num=32 --file-total-size=4G \
  --file-test-mode=seqwr --num-threads=512 \
  --file-block-size=32768 --max-time=60 --file-io-mode=sync prepare
$ sysbench --test=fileio --file-num=32 --file-total-size=4G \
  --file-test-mode=seqwr --num-threads=512 \
  --file-block-size=32768 --max-time=60 --file-io-mode=sync run

Before this path:

run 1 - 64.049Mb/sec
run 2 - 63.455Mb/sec
run 3 - 64.656Mb/sec
run 4 - 63.833Mb/sec

After this patch:

run 1 - 66.149Mb/sec
run 2 - 68.459Mb/sec
run 3 - 66.338Mb/sec
run 4 - 66.176Mb/sec

With random writes (--file-test-mode=rndwr) I had huge fluctuations
on the results (+- 35% easily).
Signed-off-by: NFilipe David Borba Manana <fdmanana@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <clm@fb.com>