btrfs: use refcount_inc_not_zero in kill_all_nodes

commit baf320b9d531f1cfbf64c60dd155ff80a58b3796 upstream.

We hit the following warning while running down a different problem

[ 6197.175850] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 6197.185082] refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free.
[ 6197.194704] WARNING: CPU: 47 PID: 966 at lib/refcount.c:190 refcount_sub_and_test_checked+0x53/0x60
[ 6197.521792] Call Trace:
[ 6197.526687]  __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x76/0x1c0
[ 6197.536615]  btrfs_kill_all_delayed_nodes+0xec/0x130
[ 6197.546532]  ? __btrfs_btree_balance_dirty+0x60/0x60
[ 6197.556482]  btrfs_clean_one_deleted_snapshot+0x71/0xd0
[ 6197.566910]  cleaner_kthread+0xfa/0x120
[ 6197.574573]  kthread+0x111/0x130
[ 6197.581022]  ? kthread_create_on_node+0x60/0x60
[ 6197.590086]  ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
[ 6197.597228] ---[ end trace 424bb7ae00509f56 ]---

This is because the free side drops the ref without the lock, and then
takes the lock if our refcount is 0.  So you can have nodes on the tree
that have a refcount of 0.  Fix this by zero'ing out that element in our
temporary array so we don't try to kill it again.

CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.14+
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
[ add comment ]
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions