On 7/2/25 2:24 PM, Luck, Tony wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 10:16:50PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
>
> +Reinette
Thank you Tony.
>
>> ->write() of file_operations that gets used only via debugfs_create_file()
>> is called only under debugfs_file_get()
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> fs/resctrl/pseudo_lock.c | 4 ----
>> 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/resctrl/pseudo_lock.c b/fs/resctrl/pseudo_lock.c
>> index ccc2f9213b4b..87bbc2605de1 100644
>> --- a/fs/resctrl/pseudo_lock.c
>> +++ b/fs/resctrl/pseudo_lock.c
>> @@ -764,13 +764,9 @@ static ssize_t pseudo_lock_measure_trigger(struct file *file,
>> if (ret == 0) {
>> if (sel != 1 && sel != 2 && sel != 3)
>> return -EINVAL;
>> - ret = debugfs_file_get(file->f_path.dentry);
>> - if (ret)
>> - return ret;
>> ret = pseudo_lock_measure_cycles(rdtgrp, sel);
>> if (ret == 0)
>> ret = count;
>> - debugfs_file_put(file->f_path.dentry);
>> }
>>
>> return ret;
>> --
>> 2.39.5
>>
Thank you very much for catching and fixing this Al.
Acked-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@xxxxxxxxx>
How are the patches from this series expected to flow upstream?
resctrl changes usually flow upstream via tip. Would you be ok if
I pick just this patch and route it via tip or would you prefer to
keep it with this series? At this time I do not anticipate
any conflicts if this patch goes upstream via other FS changes during
this cycle.
Reinette
