lib: radix-tree: check accounting of existing slot replacement users

The bug in khugepaged fixed earlier in this series shows that radix tree
slot replacement is fragile; and it will become more so when not only
NULL<->!NULL transitions need to be caught but transitions from and to
exceptional entries as well.  We need checks.

Re-implement radix_tree_replace_slot() on top of the sanity-checked
__radix_tree_replace().  This requires existing callers to also pass the
radix tree root, but it'll warn us when somebody replaces slots with
contents that need proper accounting (transitions between NULL entries,
real entries, exceptional entries) and where a replacement through the
slot pointer would corrupt the radix tree node counts.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <[email protected]>
Suggested-by: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
Cc: Kirill A. Shutemov <[email protected]>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/tools/testing/radix-tree/multiorder.c b/tools/testing/radix-tree/multiorder.c
index 05d7bc488971..d1be94667a30 100644
--- a/tools/testing/radix-tree/multiorder.c
+++ b/tools/testing/radix-tree/multiorder.c
@@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ static void multiorder_check(unsigned long index, int order)
 
 	slot = radix_tree_lookup_slot(&tree, index);
 	free(*slot);
-	radix_tree_replace_slot(slot, item2);
+	radix_tree_replace_slot(&tree, slot, item2);
 	for (i = min; i < max; i++) {
 		struct item *item = item_lookup(&tree, i);
 		assert(item != 0);