On 30/03/17 11:56, Richard Weinberger wrote: > It is perfectly fine to link a tmpfile back using linkat(). > Since tmpfiles are created with a link count of 0 they appear > on the orphan list, upon re-linking the inode has to be removed > from the orphan list again. > > Cc: <[email protected]> > Cc: Ralph Sennhauser <[email protected]> > Cc: Amir Goldstein <[email protected] > Reported-by: Ralph Sennhauser <[email protected]> > Tested-by: Ralph Sennhauser <[email protected]> > Reported-by: Amir Goldstein <[email protected] > Fixes: 474b93704f321 ("ubifs: Implement O_TMPFILE") > Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <[email protected]> > --- > fs/ubifs/dir.c | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/dir.c b/fs/ubifs/dir.c > index 0858213a4e63..0139155045fe 100644 > --- a/fs/ubifs/dir.c > +++ b/fs/ubifs/dir.c > @@ -748,6 +748,11 @@ static int ubifs_link(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct > inode *dir, > goto out_fname; > > lock_2_inodes(dir, inode); > + > + /* Handle O_TMPFILE corner case, it is allowed to link a O_TMPFILE. */ > + if (inode->i_nlink == 0) > + ubifs_delete_orphan(c, inode->i_ino);
Isn't there also a deletion inode in the journal? If the recovery sees that won't it delete the file data?
