[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1210311117310.1954-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 11:20:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
cc: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.de>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] PM / Runtime: introduce pm_runtime_set[get]_memalloc_noio()
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012, Ming Lei wrote:
> The below idea may help the problem which 'memalloc_noio' flag isn't set during
> usb_reset_device().
>
> - for usb mass storage device, call pm_runtime_set_memalloc_noio(true)
> inside usb_stor_probe2() and uas_probe(), and call
> pm_runtime_set_memalloc_noio(false) inside uas_disconnect()
> and usb_stor_disconnect().
Why would you want to do that? The probe and disconnect routines
usually -- but not always -- run in the khubd thread. Surely you don't
want to prevent khubd from using GFP_KERNEL?
And what if probe runs in khubd but disconnect runs in a different
thread?
Alan Stern
--
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