From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755668AbbIALjo (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 1 Sep 2015 07:39:44 -0400
Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:45655 "EHLO
	casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752309AbbIALjn (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 1 Sep 2015 07:39:43 -0400
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 13:39:39 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Taku Izumi <izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org,
        jolsa@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2][RESEND] perf, x86: Fix multi-segment problem of
 perf_event_intel_uncore
Message-ID: <20150901113939.GS19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1440672872-129663-1-git-send-email-izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com>
 <20150901111533.GQ19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20150901113147.GA11161@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150901113147.GA11161@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 01:31:47PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> 
> > +struct __find_pci2phy(int segment)
> > +{
> > +	struct pci2phy_map *map;
> > +
> > +	lockdep_assert_held(&pci2phy_map_lock);
> > +
> > +	list_for_each_entry(map, &pci2phy_map_head, list) {
> > +		if (map->segment == segment)
> > +			return map;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	map = kmalloc(sizeof(struct pci2phy_map), GFP_ATOMIC);
> 
> I really don't think we should be adding new GFP_ATOMIC allocations whenever it 
> can be avoided.

I tend to agree, it makes the whole thing rather fragile...