Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:31:06 +0300 | From | Alexey Dobriyan <> | Subject | [PATCH -mm] proc: remove pathetic ->deleted WARN_ON |
| |
WARN_ON(de && de->deleted); is sooo unreliable. Why?
proc_lookup remove_proc_entry =========== ================= lock_kernel(); spin_lock(&proc_subdir_lock); [find proc entry] spin_unlock(&proc_subdir_lock); spin_lock(&proc_subdir_lock); [find proc entry]
proc_get_inode ============== WARN_ON(de && de->deleted); ...
if (!atomic_read(&de->count)) free_proc_entry(de); else de->deleted = 1;
So, if you have some strange oops [1], and doesn't see this WARN_ON it means nothing.
[1] try_module_get() of module which doesn't exist, two lines below should suffice, or not?
Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@sw.ru> ---
fs/proc/inode.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/proc/inode.c +++ b/fs/proc/inode.c @@ -418,8 +418,6 @@ struct inode *proc_get_inode(struct supe { struct inode * inode; - WARN_ON(de && de->deleted); - if (de != NULL && !try_module_get(de->owner)) goto out_mod; - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |