From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxx> If we failed to fully setup the whiteout inode during a rename operation with the whiteout flag, we ended up leaking the inode, not decrementing its link count nor removing all its items from the fs/subvol tree. Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxx> --- fs/btrfs/inode.c | 12 ++++++------ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c index 09947cb..ab64721 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c @@ -9612,21 +9612,21 @@ static int btrfs_whiteout_for_rename(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, ret = btrfs_init_inode_security(trans, inode, dir, &dentry->d_name); if (ret) - return ret; + goto out; ret = btrfs_add_nondir(trans, dir, dentry, inode, 0, index); if (ret) - return ret; + goto out; ret = btrfs_update_inode(trans, root, inode); - if (ret) - return ret; - +out: unlock_new_inode(inode); + if (ret) + inode_dec_link_count(inode); iput(inode); - return 0; + return ret; } static int btrfs_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry, -- 2.7.0.rc3 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
