lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-03-13 15:27    [W:0.190 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site