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

[Sascha Hauer]

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@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  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?

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Steuerwalder Str. 21                       | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany                  | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |