[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151204213027.GA6397@amd>
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 22:30:27 +0100
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: eric.dumazet@...il.com, mhocko@...nel.org, akpm@...l.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jcliburn@...il.com,
chris.snook@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, rjw@...ysocki.net,
linux-mm@...ck.org, nic-devel@...lcomm.com, ronangeles@...il.com,
ebiederm@...ssion.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] atl1c: Improve driver not to do order 4 GFP_ATOMIC
allocation
On Fri 2015-12-04 11:21:40, David Miller wrote:
> From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
> Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 09:11:27 +0100
>
> >> >> if (unlikely(!ring_header->desc)) {
> >> >> - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "pci_alloc_consistend failed\n");
> >> >> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "could not get memory for DMA buffer\n");
> >> >> goto err_nomem;
> >> >> }
> >> >> memset(ring_header->desc, 0, ring_header->size);
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > So this memset() will really require a different patch to get removed ?
> >> >
> >> > Sigh, not sure why I review patches.
> >>
> >> Agreed, please use dma_zalloc_coherent() and kill that memset().
> >
> > Ok, updated. I'll also add cc: stable, because it makes notebooks with
> > affected chipset unusable.
>
> Networking patches do not use CC: stable, instead you simply ask me
> to queue it up and then I batch submit networking fixes to -stable
> periodically myself.
Ok, can you take the patch and ignore the Cc, or should I do one more
iteration?
Thanks,
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists