The patch titled
Subject: proc: don't use READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE for /proc/*/fail-nth
has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was
proc-dont-use-read_once-write_once-for-proc-fail-nth.patch
This patch was dropped because it was merged into mainline or a subsystem tree
------------------------------------------------------
From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: proc: don't use READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE for /proc/*/fail-nth
READ_ONCE and WRITE_ONCE are useless when there is only one read/write
is being made.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20171120204033.GA9446@avx2
Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/proc/base.c | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff -puN fs/proc/base.c~proc-dont-use-read_once-write_once-for-proc-fail-nth fs/proc/base.c
--- a/fs/proc/base.c~proc-dont-use-read_once-write_once-for-proc-fail-nth
+++ a/fs/proc/base.c
@@ -1370,7 +1370,7 @@ static ssize_t proc_fail_nth_write(struc
task = get_proc_task(file_inode(file));
if (!task)
return -ESRCH;
- WRITE_ONCE(task->fail_nth, n);
+ task->fail_nth = n;
put_task_struct(task);
return count;
@@ -1386,8 +1386,7 @@ static ssize_t proc_fail_nth_read(struct
task = get_proc_task(file_inode(file));
if (!task)
return -ESRCH;
- len = snprintf(numbuf, sizeof(numbuf), "%u\n",
- READ_ONCE(task->fail_nth));
+ len = snprintf(numbuf, sizeof(numbuf), "%u\n", task->fail_nth);
len = simple_read_from_buffer(buf, count, ppos, numbuf, len);
put_task_struct(task);
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx are
seq_file-delete-small-value-optimization.patch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe mm-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
