tree 96b7cfef8124c23b6a17ded73fddffc567d6f2a1
parent 29ae07b702cb77dbc24b0843f15ee8cf8a642311
author Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> 1312043659 -0400
committer Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> 1312043659 -0400

ext4: fix races in ext4_sync_parent()

Fix problems if fsync() races against a rename of a parent directory
as pointed out by Al Viro in his own inimitable way:

>While we are at it, could somebody please explain what the hell is ext4
>doing in
>static int ext4_sync_parent(struct inode *inode)
>{
>        struct writeback_control wbc;
>        struct dentry *dentry = NULL;
>        int ret = 0;
>
>        while (inode && ext4_test_inode_state(inode, EXT4_STATE_NEWENTRY)) {
>                ext4_clear_inode_state(inode, EXT4_STATE_NEWENTRY);
>                dentry = list_entry(inode->i_dentry.next,
>                                    struct dentry, d_alias);
>                if (!dentry || !dentry->d_parent || !dentry->d_parent->d_inode)
>                        break;
>                inode = dentry->d_parent->d_inode;
>                ret = sync_mapping_buffers(inode->i_mapping);
>                ...
>Note that dentry obviously can't be NULL there.  dentry->d_parent is never
>NULL.  And dentry->d_parent would better not be negative, for crying out
>loud!  What's worse, there's no guarantees that dentry->d_parent will
>remain our parent over that sync_mapping_buffers() *and* that inode won't
>just be freed under us (after rename() and memory pressure leading to
>eviction of what used to be our dentry->d_parent)......

Reported-by: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>