Re: [PATCH 4/6] crypto: talitos - fix GFP flag usage

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 07:26:14 -0500
Kumar Gala <galak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> On Jul 17, 2008, at 7:17 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 06:33:45PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> >>
> >> On Jul 16, 2008, at 6:22 PM, Kim Phillips wrote:
> >>
> >>> use GFP_ATOMIC when necessary; use atomic_t when allocating
> >>> submit_count.
> >>
> >> why?
> >
> > You mean why are atomics required? Yes that is a good question.
> 
> Yep. the commit message isn't explaining why, just what :)

In honouring requests that don't have the CRYPTO_TFM_REQ_MAY_SLEEP set,
afaict, it's the standard non-wait variant GFP that drivers use (see
the ixp4xx driver for e.g.).

Kim
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel]     [Gnu Classpath]     [Gnu Crypto]     [DM Crypt]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]

  Powered by Linux