On Thu, 12 Jan 2012, James Smart wrote:
Julia,
We actually do not want any ATOMIC allocations if we can avoid them. We
reworked the calling sequence to deal with the locks being held. The change
will be in the next patch set.
As such - Nack on the patch.
No problem. It was more a bug report than a real patch.
thanks,
julia
-- james s
On 1/9/2012 4:40 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
From: Julia Lawall<julia.lawall@xxxxxxx>
The function is called with locks held and thus should not use GFP_KERNEL.
The semantic patch that makes this report is available
in scripts/coccinelle/locks/call_kern.cocci.
More information about semantic patching is available at
http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/
Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall<julia.lawall@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c
index 23a2759..622d24f 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c
@@ -601,7 +601,7 @@ __lpfc_set_rrq_active(struct lpfc_hba *phba, struct
lpfc_nodelist *ndlp,
if (test_and_set_bit(xritag, ndlp->active_rrqs.xri_bitmap))
goto out;
- rrq = mempool_alloc(phba->rrq_pool, GFP_KERNEL);
+ rrq = mempool_alloc(phba->rrq_pool, GFP_ATOMIC);
if (rrq) {
rrq->send_rrq = send_rrq;
rrq->xritag = xritag;
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
