aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/net/can/proc.c
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2009-08-29can: switch to seq_fileAlexey Dobriyan
create_proc_read_entry() is going to be removed soon. Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2009-03-31proc 2/2: remove struct proc_dir_entry::ownerAlexey Dobriyan
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=12454 Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
2008-01-28[CAN]: Add PF_CAN core moduleOliver Hartkopp
This patch adds the CAN core functionality but no protocols or drivers. No protocol implementations are included here. They come as separate patches. Protocol numbers are already in include/linux/can.h. Signed-off-by: Oliver Hartkopp <oliver.hartkopp@volkswagen.de> Signed-off-by: Urs Thuermann <urs.thuermann@volkswagen.de> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>