lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Jul]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Improve pci_alloc_consistent wrapper on preemptive kernels
At Fri, 30 Jul 2004 20:47:21 +0200,
I wrote:
>
> At Fri, 30 Jul 2004 14:07:57 -0400,
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >
> > Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 13:16:28 -0400
> > > Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>1) Changing from GFP_ATOMIC to <something else> may break code
> > >
> > >
> > > x86-64 did it for a long time and I am not aware of problems with it
> > > (however I don't know how widespread CONFIG_PREEMPT use on x86-64 is)
> > >
> > >
> > >>2) Conversely from #1, I also worry why GFP_ATOMIC would be needed at
> > >>all. I code all my drivers to require that pci_alloc_consistent() be
> > >>called from somewhere that is allowed to sleep.
> > >
> > >
> > > Maybe you do, but others don't.
> >
> > Certainly. Therefore, changing from GFP_ATOMIC will increase likelihood
> > of breakage, no?
>
> pci_alloc_consistent() was GFP_ATOMIC only on 2.4 anyway, so I don't
> expect there would be any breakage...

Sorry got confused. Forget my comment above. The patch won't
break, of course (although I don't see much gain by it).

Well, I see now the necessity of this patch - pci_alloc_consistent()
is still used in so many drivers... Maybe we can clean up with a
script?


Takashi
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:0.052 / U:2.572 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site