On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 11:10:50AM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > Currently, blk_rq_map_user and blk_rq_map_user_iov always do > GFP_KERNEL allocation. > > This adds gfp_mask argument to blk_rq_map_user and blk_rq_map_user_iov > so sg can use it (sg always does GFP_ATOMIC allocation). Most GFP_ATOMIC looks rather spurious to me, and are there probably for some historic reason. Do you have a caller that actually needs GFP_ATOMIC because it's under a spinlock or from irq context, or is this just to stay as close as possible to the existing sg code? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
