On 5/13/2022 3:41 PM, Greg KH wrote:
Reported-by: kernel test robot lkp@intel.com
The trest robot did not say that the dmabuf stat name was being duplicated, did it?
It reported a printk warning on V2[1]. Should we remove this on V3?
@Christian: Could you please drop this tag while merging?
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/202205110511.E0d8TXXC-lkp@intel.com/
diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c index a6fc96e..0ad5039 100644 --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c @@ -407,6 +407,7 @@ static inline int is_dma_buf_file(struct file *file) static struct file *dma_buf_getfile(struct dma_buf *dmabuf, int flags) {
- static atomic64_t dmabuf_inode = ATOMIC64_INIT(0); struct file *file; struct inode *inode = alloc_anon_inode(dma_buf_mnt->mnt_sb);
@@ -416,6 +417,13 @@ static struct file *dma_buf_getfile(struct dma_buf *dmabuf, int flags) inode->i_size = dmabuf->size; inode_set_bytes(inode, dmabuf->size);
- /*
* The ->i_ino acquired from get_next_ino() is not unique thus* not suitable for using it as dentry name by dmabuf stats.* Override ->i_ino with the unique and dmabuffs specific* value.*/- inode->i_ino = atomic64_add_return(1, &dmabuf_inode); file = alloc_file_pseudo(inode, dma_buf_mnt, "dmabuf", flags, &dma_buf_fops); if (IS_ERR(file))
-- 2.7.4
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Thanks for the ACK.
--Charan