From: Kumar Gala Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] crypto: talitos - fix GFP flag usage Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 07:26:14 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20080716182215.36c1bd11.kim.phillips@freescale.com> <20080717121758.GA25267@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Kim Phillips , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev To: Herbert Xu Return-path: Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:55958 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751321AbYGQM0b (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jul 2008 08:26:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080717121758.GA25267@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Jul 17, 2008, at 7:17 AM, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 06:33:45PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: >> >> On Jul 16, 2008, at 6:22 PM, Kim Phillips wrote: >> >>> use GFP_ATOMIC when necessary; use atomic_t when allocating >>> submit_count. >> >> why? > > You mean why are atomics required? Yes that is a good question. Yep. the commit message isn't explaining why, just what :) > Kim? - k