From 99b76233803beab302123d243eea9e41149804f3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alexey Dobriyan Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:48:06 +0300 Subject: proc 2/2: remove struct proc_dir_entry::owner Setting ->owner as done currently (pde->owner = THIS_MODULE) is racy as correctly noted at bug #12454. Someone can lookup entry with NULL ->owner, thus not pinning enything, and release it later resulting in module refcount underflow. We can keep ->owner and supply it at registration time like ->proc_fops and ->data. But this leaves ->owner as easy-manipulative field (just one C assignment) and somebody will forget to unpin previous/pin current module when switching ->owner. ->proc_fops is declared as "const" which should give some thoughts. ->read_proc/->write_proc were just fixed to not require ->owner for protection. rmmod'ed directories will be empty and return "." and ".." -- no harm. And directories with tricky enough readdir and lookup shouldn't be modular. We definitely don't want such modular code. Removing ->owner will also make PDE smaller. So, let's nuke it. Kudos to Jeff Layton for reminding about this, let's say, oversight. http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12454 Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan --- drivers/acpi/processor_core.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/acpi/processor_core.c') diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c index 0cc2fd3..fa2f742 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c @@ -359,7 +359,6 @@ static int acpi_processor_add_fs(struct acpi_device *device) if (!acpi_device_dir(device)) return -ENODEV; } - acpi_device_dir(device)->owner = THIS_MODULE; /* 'info' [R] */ entry = proc_create_data(ACPI_PROCESSOR_FILE_INFO, @@ -1137,7 +1136,6 @@ static int __init acpi_processor_init(void) acpi_processor_dir = proc_mkdir(ACPI_PROCESSOR_CLASS, acpi_root_dir); if (!acpi_processor_dir) return -ENOMEM; - acpi_processor_dir->owner = THIS_MODULE; /* * Check whether the system is DMI table. If yes, OSPM -- cgit v1.1