To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: inappropriate use of in_atomic()
References: <20050310204006.48286d17.akpm@osdl.org>
From: Roland Dreier <roland@topspin.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 20:53:45 -0800
In-Reply-To: <20050310204006.48286d17.akpm@osdl.org> (Andrew Morton's
 message of "Thu, 10 Mar 2005 20:40:06 -0800")
Message-ID: <52k6oe9412.fsf@topspin.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) XEmacs/21.4 (Jumbo Shrimp, linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 851
Lines: 21

    > 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.

I'll check into whether we can do something cleverer, but just going
the GFP_ATOMIC route won't be horrible.

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