Re: [patch] xHCI: use gfp flags from caller instead of GFP_ATOMIC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 08:04:51PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 09:29:57AM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:09:00PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > We're not holding a lock here so we can use the gfp flags the caller
> > > specifies instead of GFP_ATOMIC.  The callers use GFP_ATOMIC so this
> > > change doesn't affect how the kernel runs, but it's a cleanup.
> > 
> > Nak.  We are holding a lock in all the xhci_queue* functions, so we
> > need GFP_ATOMIC.  It's locked in a parent function, xhci_urb_enqueue().
> > 
> 
> Sorry, bad changlog on my part.  I saw that it was locked in the
> parent, but I meant that it's not taking a lock here.  The parent
> specifies GFP_ATOMIC so the parent is fine.
> 
> I don't think we should bother passing the GFP flags if we don't use
> them.

Ok, now I understand, and I agree.  Please resend the patch with a
better change log and I'll apply it.

Sarah Sharp
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Media]     [Linux Input]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Old Linux USB Devel Archive]

  Powered by Linux