1. 18 4月, 2009 3 次提交
  2. 08 4月, 2009 5 次提交
  3. 07 4月, 2009 1 次提交
  4. 05 4月, 2009 3 次提交
  5. 04 4月, 2009 19 次提交
  6. 31 3月, 2009 2 次提交
    • A
      proc 2/2: remove struct proc_dir_entry::owner · 99b76233
      Alexey Dobriyan 提交于
      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=12454Signed-off-by: NAlexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
      99b76233
    • J
      dmi: Let dmi_walk() users pass private data · e7a19c56
      Jean Delvare 提交于
      At the moment, dmi_walk() lacks flexibility, users can't pass data to
      the callback function. Add a pointer for private data to make this
      function more flexible.
      Signed-off-by: NJean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
      Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
      Cc: Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com>
      Cc: Roland Dreier <rolandd@cisco.com>
      e7a19c56
  7. 30 3月, 2009 1 次提交
  8. 28 3月, 2009 6 次提交