From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030383AbXCMOXs (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:23:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030405AbXCMOXs (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:23:48 -0400 Received: from mailhub.sw.ru ([195.214.233.200]:10770 "EHLO relay.sw.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030383AbXCMOXr (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:23:47 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:31:06 +0300 From: Alexey Dobriyan To: akpm@osdl.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, devel@openvz.org Subject: [PATCH -mm] proc: remove pathetic ->deleted WARN_ON Message-ID: <20070313143106.GA11372@localhost.sw.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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 --- 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;