[PATCH v3 04/12] ubifs: Add missing iput if do_tmpfile() failed in rename whiteout

[Zhihao Cheng]

在 2021/11/15 16:24, Sascha Hauer 写道:
Hi, Sascha
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 08:17:50PM +0800, Zhihao Cheng wrote:
>> whiteout inode should be put when do_tmpfile() failed if inode has been
>> initialized. Otherwise we will get following warning during umount:
>>    UBIFS error (ubi0:0 pid 1494): ubifs_assert_failed [ubifs]: UBIFS
>>    assert failed: c->bi.dd_growth == 0, in fs/ubifs/super.c:1930
>>    VFS: Busy inodes after unmount of ubifs. Self-destruct in 5 seconds.
>>
>> Fixes: 9e0a1fff8db56ea ("ubifs: Implement RENAME_WHITEOUT")
>> Signed-off-by: Zhihao Cheng <chengzhihao1 at huawei.com>
>> ---
>>   fs/ubifs/dir.c | 2 ++
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/ubifs/dir.c b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
>> index 2735ad1affed..6503e6857f6e 100644
>> --- a/fs/ubifs/dir.c
>> +++ b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
>> @@ -1334,6 +1334,8 @@ static int do_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry,
>>   
>>   		err = do_tmpfile(old_dir, old_dentry, S_IFCHR | WHITEOUT_MODE, &whiteout);
>>   		if (err) {
>> +			if (whiteout)
>> +				iput(whiteout);
> Should this rather be done in do_tmpfile() directly?
Yes, I should have done it. Although next patch reconstructs do_rename() 
which makes this ugly judgement disappered. I will fix it along with 
other suggestions from other patches in next iteration. Thanks.
> Sascha
>