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 --- fs/jfs/jfs_debug.c | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'fs/jfs') diff --git a/fs/jfs/jfs_debug.c b/fs/jfs/jfs_debug.c index 6a73de84bcef..dd824d9b0b1a 100644 --- a/fs/jfs/jfs_debug.c +++ b/fs/jfs/jfs_debug.c @@ -90,7 +90,6 @@ void jfs_proc_init(void) if (!(base = proc_mkdir("fs/jfs", NULL))) return; - base->owner = THIS_MODULE; for (i = 0; i < NPROCENT; i++) proc_create(Entries[i].name, 0, base, Entries[i].proc_fops); -- cgit v1.2.2