Don't use create_proc_read_entry() as that is deprecated, but rather use
proc_create_data() and seq_file instead.
Signed-off-by: NDavid Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
cc: Bob Beers <bob.beers@gmail.com>
cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Don't use create_proc_read_entry() as that is deprecated, but rather use
proc_create_data() and seq_file instead.
Signed-off-by: NDavid Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>
cc: Priit Laes <plaes@plaes.org>
cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org
cc: Mikko Virkkilä <mikko.virkkila@bluegiga.com>
cc: Lauri Hintsala <Lauri.Hintsala@bluegiga.com>
cc: Riku Mettälä <riku.mettala@bluegiga.com>
cc: Veli-Pekka Peltola <veli-pekka.peltola@bluegiga.com>
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Don't use create_proc_read_entry() as that is deprecated, but rather use
proc_create_data() and seq_file instead.
Signed-off-by: NDavid Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
cc: David Schleef <ds@schleef.org>
cc: Ian Abbott <abbotti@mev.co.uk>
cc: Mori Hess <fmhess@users.sourceforge.net>
cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
cc: H Hartley Sweeten <hsweeten@visionengravers.com>
cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Don't use create_proc_read_entry() as that is deprecated, but rather use
proc_create_data() and seq_file instead.
Signed-off-by: NDavid Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
cc: Marek Belisko <marek.belisko@gmail.com>
cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
cc: Ondrej Zary <linux@rainbow-software.org>
cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Don't use create_proc_read_entry() as that is deprecated, but rather use
proc_create_data() and seq_file instead.  Whilst we're at it, reduce the
number of show functions where we can share them.

Question: Do any of the registers read by proc_get_registers() have side
effects upon reading?  If so, locking will be required.
Signed-off-by: NDavid Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
cc: Maxim Mikityanskiy <maxtram95@gmail.com>
cc: YAMANE Toshiaki <yamanetoshi@gmail.com>
cc: Bill Pemberton <wfp5p@virginia.edu>
cc: Andrea Merello <andreamrl@tiscali.it>
cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Don't use create_proc_read_entry() as that is deprecated, but rather use
proc_create_data() and seq_file instead.  Whilst we're at it, reduce the
number of show functions where we can share them.

Note: proc_get_stats_ap() should probably use seq_file iteration rather than
list_for_each_entry().

Further note: There appears to be a lot of locking missing in this file to
defend against concurrent access by the driver doing normal operations.
Notably, ieee->network_list traversal and RWCAM/RCAMO command/response access.
Further, do any of the registers read have side effects upon reading?
Signed-off-by: NDavid Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
cc: Jerry Chuang <jerry-chuang@realtek.com>
cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@redhat.com>
cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Mark create_proc_read_entry deprecated.  proc_create[_data]() should be used
instead.
Signed-off-by: NDavid Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

... when you have no ->owner set.
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

do add_timer() *before* unlocking dev->lock, or unpleasant things can
happen if misdn_del_timer() on another CPU finds the sucker, calls
del_timer_sync() (which does nothing, since we hadn't started the
timer yet) and frees it, just as we get around to add_timer()...
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

mark the victim with negative ->id if misdn_del_timer() finds it on
the list, have timer callback *not* move ones so marked to dev->expired
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

timer callback in timerdev.c both accesses struct mISDNtimer it's
called for *and* moves it to dev->expired.  We need del_timer_sync(),
or we risk kfree() freeing it right under dev_expire_timer() *and*
dev->expired getting corrupted.
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

mind you, I'm not sure WTF would anybody _need_ that miscdevice
at all - no IO is possible for it, opening it only pins the module
down and is seriously racy, at that.
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

... it's done already by __fput()
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

... if not since 0.99 or so.
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

it is not (and it has never been) an ->fsync() instance...
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

it has grown by accident - directories there do *not* use page cache, so
there's nothing to write.
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

we need to close the underlying procfs file and free ->private_data
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

switch binfmts that use ->read() to that (and to kernel_read()
in several cases in binfmt_flat - sure, it's nommu, but still,
doing ->read() into kmalloc'ed buffer...)
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

* serialize the call of ->release() on per-pdeo mutex
* don't remove pdeo from per-pde list until we are through with it
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

* leave ->proc_fops alone; make ->pde_users negative instead
* trim pde_opener
* move relevant code in fs/proc/inode.c
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Switch huge if-statement in __proc_file_read() around.  This then puts the
single line loop break immediately after the if-statement and allows us to
de-indent the huge comment and make it take fewer lines.  The code following
the if-statement then follows naturally from the call to dp->read_proc().
Signed-off-by: NDavid Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>

Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Just reading - parsing the results is left alone (and unspeakably
lousy).
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

it's opened read-only and never installed into any descriptor tables;
fput() will do just as well.
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

no need to do that anymore...
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>