login
Search
The following comment is found in include/linux/sysfs.h:
/* FIXME
* The *owner field is no longer used.
* x86 tree has been cleaned up. The owner
* attribute is still left for other arches.
*/
As it turns out, the *owner field is (again?) initialized in several modules,
suggesting that such initialization may be creeping back into the code.
This patch set removes the above comment, the *owner field, and each instance
in the code where it was found to be initialized.
Compiled with x86 allmodconfig as well as with all alpha, arm, mips, powerpc,
and sparc defconfig builds.
--
Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com>
---
drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_attr.c | 1 -
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_attr.c b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_attr.c
index bf33b31..8f89edf 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_attr.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_attr.c
@@ -2720,7 +2720,6 @@ static struct bin_attribute sysfs_drvr_stat_data_attr = {
.attr = {
.name = "lpfc_drvr_stat_data",
.mode = S_IRUSR,
- .owner = THIS_MODULE,
},
.size = LPFC_MAX_TARGET * MAX_STAT_DATA_SIZE_PER_TARGET,
.read = sysfs_drvr_stat_data_read,
--
1.7.0.87.g0901d
--
Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> --- drivers/regulator/core.c | 1 - 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c index 2248087..422a709 100644 --- a/drivers/regulator/core.c +++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c @@ -1025,7 +1025,6 @@ static struct regulator *create_regulator(struct regulator_dev *rdev, if (regulator->dev_attr.attr.name == NULL) goto attr_name_err; - regulator->dev_attr.attr.owner = THIS_MODULE; regulator->dev_attr.attr.mode = 0444; regulator->dev_attr.show = device_requested_uA_show; err = device_create_file(dev, &regulator->dev_attr); -- 1.7.0.87.g0901d --
Acked-by: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> --
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:09 PM, Guenter Roeck This seems reasonable to me. Can we get this in linux-next? Eric --
It will show up in linux-next tomorrow. thanks, greg k-h --
Related bug? https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16544 -- Jean Delvare --
Hi Jean, Yep, fixed in linux-next today - hopefully the fix is on its way to Linus. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Hi Jean, Sorry, more info: Fixed by commit 690e85a3957291f4cfe0cac22d97994ec7e5ee45 ("olpc_battery: Fix build failure caused by sysfs changes") from the battery tree. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Excellent. Guess the patch I sent out earlier today to fix the problem wasn't needed then. Guenter --
Yeah, the change is way overdue. Maybe we should have just removed them back then. Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Thanks. -- tejun --
I'm happy with the powerpc related patches as long as we all agree that needs to go. Do you need me to put some of this in powerpc.git or are you carrying them all to Linus ? Cheers, --
I can carry them all in my driver-core tree if you don't object. thanks, greg k-h --
Any final verdict ? Not that it is my decision to make, but I think it would be better to have it all in one tree. Otherwise the timing for the last patch would get a bit complicated. Thanks, Guenter --