Am 30.03.2017 um 11:49 schrieb Richard Weinberger: > Am 30.03.2017 um 11:32 schrieb Adrian Hunter: >>> 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? > > Yes, but ubifs_link() adds a new journal entry which revives the inode. > This should cancel out the deletion, right? > You know the UBIFS journal better than I do. :-)
Reading deeper into the proved that I was wrong. AFAIKT UBIFS' journal has currently no way to revive a deleted inode. So, we have to think about a new solution. Thanks, //richard
