On Thu, Jul 07, 2022 at 03:58:35PM -0700, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote: > From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> > > commit e445976537ad139162980bee015b7364e5b64fff upstream. > > Ayushman Dutta reported our 5.10 kernel hit the warning. It was because > the original commit misses a Fixes tag and was not backported to the stable > tree. The fix is merged in 5.16, so please backport it to 5.15 first. > > This ASSERT in xfs_rename is a) incorrect, because > (RENAME_WHITEOUT|RENAME_NOREPLACE) is a valid combination, and > b) unnecessary, because actual invalid flag combinations are already > handled at the vfs level in do_renameat2() before we get called. > So, remove it. > > Reported-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> > Fixes: 7dcf5c3e4527 ("xfs: add RENAME_WHITEOUT support") > Reported-by: Ayushman Dutta <ayudutta@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@xxxxxxxxxx> Looks good to me, but you really ought to send 5.10 patches to the 5.10 XFS maintainer (Amir, now cc'd). (Yes, this is a recent change.) ;) Acked-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> --D > --- > I will send another patch for 4.9 - 5.4 because of a conflict with idmapped > mount changes. > --- > fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c > index 2477e301fa82..c19f3ca605af 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c > @@ -3128,7 +3128,6 @@ xfs_rename( > * appropriately. > */ > if (flags & RENAME_WHITEOUT) { > - ASSERT(!(flags & (RENAME_NOREPLACE | RENAME_EXCHANGE))); > error = xfs_rename_alloc_whiteout(mnt_userns, target_dp, &wip); > if (error) > return error; > -- > 2.30.2 >