On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 1:07 PM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 12:38:16PM +0200, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
>> This commit removes KS_WLAN_MEM_FLAG definition which is
>> hiding GFP_ATOMIC along the code. It is better to use directly
>> GFP_ATOMIC in kmalloc's because this it is easier to read.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sergio Paracuellos <sergio.paracuellos@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c | 6 ++----
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c
>> index e336d25..208c91e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c
>> @@ -38,8 +38,6 @@ static inline unsigned int cnt_smeqbody(struct ks_wlan_private *priv)
>> return (sme_cnt + SME_EVENT_BUFF_SIZE) % SME_EVENT_BUFF_SIZE;
>> }
>>
>> -#define KS_WLAN_MEM_FLAG (GFP_ATOMIC)
>> -
>> static inline u8 get_byte(struct ks_wlan_private *priv)
>> {
>> u8 data;
>> @@ -1044,7 +1042,7 @@ static void *hostif_generic_request(size_t size, int event)
>> {
>> struct hostif_hdr *p;
>>
>> - p = kzalloc(hif_align_size(size), KS_WLAN_MEM_FLAG);
>> + p = kzalloc(hif_align_size(size), GFP_ATOMIC);
>
> If there were a ton of these, then I probably would be OK with a
> straight sed like this. But there are only two places. Probably
> neither allocation needs to be atomic. Could you do some research to
> see if we can just use GFP_KERNEL here?
I think is correct as it is because it is in a tasklet context so we
cannot sleep.
>
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>
Best regards,
Sergio Paracuellos
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
