proc 2/2: remove struct proc_dir_entry::owner

Setting ->owner as done currently (pde->owner = THIS_MODULE) is racy
as correctly noted at bug #12454. Someone can lookup entry with NULL
->owner, thus not pinning enything, and release it later resulting
in module refcount underflow.

We can keep ->owner and supply it at registration time like ->proc_fops
and ->data.

But this leaves ->owner as easy-manipulative field (just one C assignment)
and somebody will forget to unpin previous/pin current module when
switching ->owner. ->proc_fops is declared as "const" which should give
some thoughts.

->read_proc/->write_proc were just fixed to not require ->owner for
protection.

rmmod'ed directories will be empty and return "." and ".." -- no harm.
And directories with tricky enough readdir and lookup shouldn't be modular.
We definitely don't want such modular code.

Removing ->owner will also make PDE smaller.

So, let's nuke it.

Kudos to Jeff Layton for reminding about this, let's say, oversight.

http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12454

Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>

drivers/acpi/processor_core.c

@@ -359,7 +359,6 @@ static int acpi_processor_add_fs(struct acpi_device *device)
 		if (!acpi_device_dir(device))
 			return -ENODEV;
 	}
-	acpi_device_dir(device)->owner = THIS_MODULE;
 
 	/* 'info' [R] */
 	entry = proc_create_data(ACPI_PROCESSOR_FILE_INFO,
@@ -1137,7 +1136,6 @@ static int __init acpi_processor_init(void)
 	acpi_processor_dir = proc_mkdir(ACPI_PROCESSOR_CLASS, acpi_root_dir);
 	if (!acpi_processor_dir)
 		return -ENOMEM;
-	acpi_processor_dir->owner = THIS_MODULE;
 
 	/*
 	 * Check whether the system is DMI table. If yes, OSPM