linux-kernel - Re: can a kmalloc be both GFP_ATOMIC and GFP

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a781481a0704301204i247a5123r1e6146c99b2e467e@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 1 May 2007 00:34:10 +0530
From:	"Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@...il.com>
To:	"Alan Cox" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"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?

On 4/30/07, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> 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).

Yes, none of the above appear to be atomic contexts. GFP_KERNEL in
that case would've been a bug. If they were atomic contexts, someone
somewhere would've been seeing a lot of "BUG: sleeping function called
from invalid context" messages and would've probably brought it to
lkml's notice already ;-) So the GFP_ATOMIC seems to be redundant
thing here in both cases.
-
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/