Return-path: Received: from mail.atheros.com ([12.36.123.2]:53408 "EHLO mail.atheros.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754915Ab0CQN5W (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:57:22 -0400 Received: from mail.atheros.com ([10.10.20.105]) by sidewinder.atheros.com for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 06:57:22 -0700 Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 06:56:00 +0530 From: Senthil Balasubramanian To: Johannes Berg CC: "John W. Linville" , Senthilkumar Balasubramanian , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , Jiri Slaby , "Luis R. Rodriguez" Subject: Re: [PATCH] wireless: convert reg_regdb_search_lock to mutex Message-ID: <20100317012559.GD2210@senthil-lnx.colubris.lan> References: <4B9F86E9.2030702@gmail.com> <1268768940-5654-1-git-send-email-linville@tuxdriver.com> <20100316100337.GA1732@senthil-lnx.users.atheros.com> <20100317002416.GA2095@tuxdriver.com> <20100316122449.GA17826@senthil-lnx.users.atheros.com> <20100317025656.GA9058@tuxdriver.com> <1268796275.7068.8.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" In-Reply-To: <1268796275.7068.8.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 08:54:35AM +0530, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 22:56 -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 05:54:50PM +0530, Senthil Balasubramanian wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 05:54:16AM +0530, John W. Linville wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 03:33:38PM +0530, Senthil Balasubramanian wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 01:19:00AM +0530, John W. Linville wrote: > > > > > > Stanse discovered that kmalloc can be called with GFP_KERNEL while > > > > > This commit log is confusing. It Should be "Stanse discovered kmalloc > > > > > was called with GFP_KERNEL". Obviously kmalloc with GFP_KERNEL shouldn't > > > > > be used while holding a spinlock. > > > > > > holding this spinlock. It can be a mutex instead. > > > > > > > > Not half so confusing as your criticism... :-) > > > sorry! if my mail wasn't proper. I didn't meant to blame/criticize. > > > I was confused when I read the commit log and so I replied. > > > > > > > > Are you objecting to "can be" instead of "was"? > > > I am not objecting anything... > > > > Criticism is fine -- I just don't understand what you were saying or > > what you think I should have said in the commit log. > > English at work ... let me guess: Yes. I basically misread the commit log and understood like GFP_KENREL is allowed while holding a spinlock. So I replied. Sorry! for the unnecessary noise.. here... Please ignore my comment. > > For John: "can" == "it could happen that" > For Senthil: "can" == "may" > > (when really you may NOT do GFP_KERNEL allocations in atomic context) > > johannes >