[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1808276.ZJn2ZeULZY@aspire.rjw.lan>
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2018 10:51:41 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@...il.com>
Cc: lenb@...nel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: osl: Replace GFP_ATOMIC with GFP_KERNEL in acpi_os_execute
On Thursday, January 25, 2018 11:13:41 AM CET Jia-Ju Bai wrote:
> After checking all possible call chains to acpi_os_execute here,
> my tool finds that acpi_os_execute is never called in atomic context.
> And acpi_os_execute calls acpi_debugger_create_thread
> which calls mutex_lock,
> thus it proves again that acpi_os_execute can
> call functions which may sleep.
> Thus GFP_ATOMIC is not necessary, and it can be replaced with GFP_KERNEL.
>
> This is found by a static analysis tool named DCNS written by myself.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@...il.com>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/osl.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> index 3bb46cb..8ee605e 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> @@ -1066,7 +1066,7 @@ acpi_status acpi_os_execute(acpi_execute_type type,
> * having a static work_struct.
> */
>
> - dpc = kzalloc(sizeof(struct acpi_os_dpc), GFP_ATOMIC);
> + dpc = kzalloc(sizeof(struct acpi_os_dpc), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!dpc)
> return AE_NO_MEMORY;
>
>
Applied, thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists