v3.19.8-ckt17 -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let
me know.
---8<------------------------------------------------------------
From: Al Viro <v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
commit f93812846f31381d35c04c6c577d724254355e7f upstream.
d_instantiate(new_dentry, old_inode) is absolutely wrong thing to
do - it will oops if new_dentry used to be positive, for starters.
What we need is d_invalidate() the target and be done with that.
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
[ kamal: backport to 3.19-stable: context ]
Signed-off-by: Kamal Mostafa <ka...@canonical.com>
---
fs/jffs2/dir.c | 11 ++++++++---
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/jffs2/dir.c b/fs/jffs2/dir.c
index 9385560..6dda1f6 100644
--- a/fs/jffs2/dir.c
+++ b/fs/jffs2/dir.c
@@ -845,9 +845,14 @@ static int jffs2_rename (struct inode *old_dir_i, struct
dentry *old_dentry,
pr_notice("%s(): Link succeeded, unlink failed (err %d). You
now have a hard link\n",
__func__, ret);
- /* Might as well let the VFS know */
- d_instantiate(new_dentry, old_dentry->d_inode);
- ihold(old_dentry->d_inode);
+ /*
+ * We can't keep the target in dcache after that.
+ * For one thing, we can't afford dentry aliases for
directories.
+ * For another, if there was a victim, we _can't_ set new inode
+ * for that sucker and we have to trigger mount eviction - the
+ * caller won't do it on its own since we are returning an
error.
+ */
+ d_invalidate(new_dentry);
new_dir_i->i_mtime = new_dir_i->i_ctime = ITIME(now);
return ret;
}
--
2.7.0
