On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 12:35:45 -0400 Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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, No, we don't have. > or is this just to stay as close as possible to the existing sg > code? Yes, I don't change sg behavior. GFP_NOWAIT would be more appropriate than GFP_ATOMIC for sg, I guess. But let me finish the conversion without changing sg behavior. I know changing the behavior makes it more difficult to get Doug's ACK on these patches. -- 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
