Re: inappropriate use of in_atomic()

[Arjan van de Ven]

On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 20:53 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
>     > Consequently the use of in_atomic() in the below files is probably
>     > deadlocky if CONFIG_PREEMPT=n:
>     ...
>     > 	drivers/infiniband/core/mad.c
> 
> Thanks for pointing this out.  I'll get you a patch in the next day or
> two.  As you can probably tell, the code is just trying to decide
> whether to use GFP_ATOMIC or GFP_KERNEL to allocate a couple of
> things, depending on what context we're being called from.  So at
> worst we can just change to GFP_ATOMIC unconditionally.

normally you are supposed to know what context your allocating function
is called in... if you don't know that often is a sign of a misdesign...

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/