[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070430182135.0fae7b89@the-village.bc.nu>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 18:21:35 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: can a kmalloc be both GFP_ATOMIC and GFP_KERNEL at the same
time?
> > > > drivers/scsi/aic7xxx_old.c: aic_dev = kmalloc(sizeof(struct aic_dev_data), GFP_ATOMIC | GFP_KERNEL);
> > > > drivers/message/i2o/device.c: resblk = kmalloc(buflen + 8, GFP_KERNEL | GFP_ATOMIC);
> > > >
> > > > clarification?
> > >
> > > GFP_ATOMIC implies that the memory comes from the zones which
> > > GFP_KERNEL also uses. So the above usage of GFP_KERNEL is redundant
> > > and should be removed.
> >
> > hang on ... based on an email i just got, is that reference to
> > GFP_KERNEL "redundant" or "conflicting"? big difference there. and
> > is the proper fix to remove "GFP_KERNEL" in both cases?
> >
>
> umm, yeah, oops. GFP_KERNEL|GFP_ATOMIC is not a redundant combination.
> It's GFP_KERNEL plus "is able to access emergency pools". We'd normally
> represent that as GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_HIGH.
i2o/device.c should be GFP_KERNEL as far as I can tell. It was meant to
be that way and the callers appear to all be calling it in sleep capable
contexts.
aic7xxx_old.c should probably be GFP_KERNEL as ->slave_alloc methods
appear to be able to sleep (although some drivers use GFP_ATOMIC here and
some GFP_KERNEL).
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists