We are still chasing some syzbot reports where we think a rogue dev_put()
is called with no corresponding prior dev_hold().
Unfortunately it eats a reference on dev->dev_refcnt taken by innocent
dev_hold_track(), meaning that the refcount saturation splat comes
too late to be useful.

Make sure that 'not tracked' dev_put() and dev_hold() better use
CONFIG_NET_DEV_REFCNT_TRACKER=y debug infrastructure:

Prior patch in the series allowed ref_tracker_alloc() and ref_tracker_free()
to be called with a NULL @trackerp parameter, and to use a separate refcount
only to detect too many put() even in the following case:

dev_hold_track(dev, tracker_1, GFP_ATOMIC);
 dev_hold(dev);
 dev_put(dev);
 dev_put(dev); // Should complain loudly here.
dev_put_track(dev, tracker_1); // instead of here

Add clarification about netdev_tracker_alloc() role.

v2: I replaced the dev_put() in linkwatch_do_dev()
    with __dev_put() because callers called netdev_tracker_free().
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>