[PATCH] ubifs: Fix wrong orphan node deletion in ubifs_jnl_update()

[Zhihao Cheng]

在 2020/7/7 19:52, Richard Weinberger 写道:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 5:21 PM Zhihao Cheng <chengzhihao1 at huawei.com> wrote:
>> There a wrong orphan node deleting in error handling path in
>> ubifs_jnl_update(), which may cause following error msg:
>>
>>    UBIFS error (ubi0:0 pid 1522): ubifs_delete_orphan [ubifs]:
>>    missing orphan ino 65
>>
>> Fix this by checking whether the node has been operated for
>> adding to orphan list before being deleted,
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zhihao Cheng <chengzhihao1 at huawei.com>
>> ---
>>   fs/ubifs/journal.c | 5 +++--
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/ubifs/journal.c b/fs/ubifs/journal.c
>> index e5ec1afe1c66..db0a80dd9d52 100644
>> --- a/fs/ubifs/journal.c
>> +++ b/fs/ubifs/journal.c
>> @@ -539,7 +539,7 @@ int ubifs_jnl_update(struct ubifs_info *c, const struct inode *dir,
>>                       const struct fscrypt_name *nm, const struct inode *inode,
>>                       int deletion, int xent)
>>   {
>> -       int err, dlen, ilen, len, lnum, ino_offs, dent_offs;
>> +       int err, dlen, ilen, len, lnum, ino_offs, dent_offs, orphan_added = 0;
>>          int aligned_dlen, aligned_ilen, sync = IS_DIRSYNC(dir);
>>          int last_reference = !!(deletion && inode->i_nlink == 0);
>>          struct ubifs_inode *ui = ubifs_inode(inode);
>> @@ -630,6 +630,7 @@ int ubifs_jnl_update(struct ubifs_info *c, const struct inode *dir,
>>                          goto out_finish;
>>                  }
>>                  ui->del_cmtno = c->cmt_no;
>> +               orphan_added = 1;
>>          }
>>
>>          err = write_head(c, BASEHD, dent, len, &lnum, &dent_offs, sync);
>> @@ -702,7 +703,7 @@ int ubifs_jnl_update(struct ubifs_info *c, const struct inode *dir,
>>          kfree(dent);
>>   out_ro:
>>          ubifs_ro_mode(c, err);
>> -       if (last_reference)
>> +       if (last_reference && orphan_added)
> I think you can just check for orphan_added here.
> Looks good otherwise, thanks for fixing! :-)
Sounds reasonable. I will send v2.