On Wednesday 03 February 2010, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 02:44:23 +0100 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > +static inline gfp_t clear_gfp_allowed_mask(gfp_t mask)
> > +{
> > + gfp_t ret = gfp_allowed_mask;
> > + gfp_allowed_mask &= ~mask;
> > + return ret;
> > +}
>
> Fair enuf.
>
> Of course, this is all horridly racy/buggy without locking. Would I be
> correct in hoping that all the callers happen when the system is in
> everyone-is-frozen mode?
As far as I can tell, gfp_allowed_mask is only touched during init apart from
this.
> Perhaps we should add some documentation (or even an assertion) to
> prevent someone from using these interfaces from within normal code.
I thought about that, but didn't invent anything smart enough.
Well, maybe except for a comment like "this must be called with pm_mutex held",
because that's the only case when it would be really safe.
Rafael
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
