aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas_flash.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorAlexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>2009-03-25 15:48:06 -0400
committerAlexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>2009-03-30 17:14:44 -0400
commit99b76233803beab302123d243eea9e41149804f3 (patch)
tree398178210fe66845ccd6fa4258ba762a87e023ad /arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas_flash.c
parent3dec7f59c370c7b58184d63293c3dc984d475840 (diff)
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 <adobriyan@gmail.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas_flash.c')
-rw-r--r--arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas_flash.c1
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas_flash.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas_flash.c
index 149cb112cd1a..13011a96a977 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas_flash.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas_flash.c
@@ -669,7 +669,6 @@ static void remove_flash_pde(struct proc_dir_entry *dp)
669{ 669{
670 if (dp) { 670 if (dp) {
671 kfree(dp->data); 671 kfree(dp->data);
672 dp->owner = NULL;
673 remove_proc_entry(dp->name, dp->parent); 672 remove_proc_entry(dp->name, dp->parent);
674 } 673 }
675} 674}