On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 01:11:16AM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On Jan 5 2007 00:36, Stelian Pop wrote:
> >@@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ static struct acpi_driver sony_acpi_driv
> >
> > static acpi_handle sony_acpi_handle;
> > static struct proc_dir_entry *sony_acpi_dir;
> >+static struct acpi_device *sony_acpi_acpi_device = NULL;
>
> acpi_acpi?
>
> >@@ -310,7 +315,7 @@ static int sony_acpi_add(struct acpi_dev
> > item->acpiset, &handle)))
> > continue;
> >
> >- item->proc = create_proc_entry(item->name, 0600,
> >+ item->proc = create_proc_entry(item->name, 0666,
> > acpi_device_dir(device));
> > if (!item->proc) {
> > printk(LOG_PFX "unable to create proc entry\n");
>
> Is this safe? I would not want normal users to poke on that.
Hmmm, seconded. It also seems quite a gratuitous change and I have a
different patch that takes care of permissions and the /proc stuff is
going away in any case.
--
mattia
:wq!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
