The binderfs_binder_ctl_create() call is a no-op on subsequent calls and
the first call is done before we unlock the suberblock. Hence, there is no
need to take inode_lock() in there. Let's remove it.
Suggested-by: Al Viro <v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <christ...@brauner.io>
---
Note, that fs/devptfs/inode.c:mknod_ptmx() is currently holding
inode_lock() too under the exact same circumstances. Seems that we can drop
it from there too.
---
drivers/android/binderfs.c | 4 ----
1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/android/binderfs.c b/drivers/android/binderfs.c
index c5feb9ffce0f..db09274a1b75 100644
--- a/drivers/android/binderfs.c
+++ b/drivers/android/binderfs.c
@@ -408,8 +408,6 @@ static int binderfs_binder_ctl_create(struct super_block
*sb)
if (!device)
return -ENOMEM;
- inode_lock(d_inode(root));
-
/* If we have already created a binder-control node, return. */
if (info->control_dentry) {
ret = 0;
@@ -448,12 +446,10 @@ static int binderfs_binder_ctl_create(struct super_block
*sb)
inode->i_private = device;
info->control_dentry = dentry;
d_add(dentry, inode);
- inode_unlock(d_inode(root));
return 0;
out:
- inode_unlock(d_inode(root));
kfree(device);
iput(inode);
--
2.19.1
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
