block: bd_link_disk_holder() should hold on to holder_dir
The new implementation of bd_link_disk_holder() added by 49731baa41d
(block: restore multiple bd_link_disk_holder() support) didn't get an
extra reference for the holder_dir kobject of the slave bdev; however,
bdev kills holder_dir on removal, not release, so if the slave bdev is
removed while there are holder links, the holder_dir will be destroyed
while there still are holder links, which leads to oops later when
bd_unlink_disk_order() tries to remove those links.
Make bd_link_disk_holder() grab an extra reference for the slave's
holder_dir and put it in bd_unlink_disk_holder().
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Reported-by: "Hawrylewicz Czarnowski, Przemyslaw" <przemyslaw.hawrylewicz.czarnowski@intel.com>
Tested-by: "Hawrylewicz Czarnowski, Przemyslaw" <przemyslaw.hawrylewicz.czarnowski@intel.com>
Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
diff --git a/fs/block_dev.c b/fs/block_dev.c
index 4fb8a34..94d41db 100644
--- a/fs/block_dev.c
+++ b/fs/block_dev.c
@@ -873,6 +873,11 @@
ret = add_symlink(bdev->bd_part->holder_dir, &disk_to_dev(disk)->kobj);
if (ret)
goto out_del;
+ /*
+ * bdev could be deleted beneath us which would implicitly destroy
+ * the holder directory. Hold on to it.
+ */
+ kobject_get(bdev->bd_part->holder_dir);
list_add(&holder->list, &bdev->bd_holder_disks);
goto out_unlock;
@@ -909,6 +914,7 @@
del_symlink(disk->slave_dir, &part_to_dev(bdev->bd_part)->kobj);
del_symlink(bdev->bd_part->holder_dir,
&disk_to_dev(disk)->kobj);
+ kobject_put(bdev->bd_part->holder_dir);
list_del_init(&holder->list);
kfree(holder);
}
