From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
To: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org>
Cc: Steve Wise <swise@chelsio.com>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>,
Raju Rangoju <rajur@chelsio.com>,
linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] iw_cxgb4: drop check - dead code
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 14:44:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190123214415.GA20648@ziepe.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1547947633-10515-1-git-send-email-hofrat@osadl.org>
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 02:27:13AM +0100, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> The kmalloc is called with | __GFP_NOFAIL so there is no point in
> checking the return value - it either returns valid storage or it would
> hang/terminate there. But it is not possible to say if the use of
> __GFP_NOFAIL is really needed and the check should be removed or
> vice-versa (use of __GFP_NOFAIL should be only in exceptional
> cases as I understand it and alloc_srq_queue() is called in quite
> a few places)
> In either way it would need fixing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org>
> Fixes: 6a0b6174d35a ("rdma/cxgb4: Add support for kernel mode SRQ's")
> ---
As per steve's remarkes I revised this to the below and applied it to
for-next
>From 4b2d4262ee2ea58df867de1928bf208795344432 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2019 02:27:13 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] RDMA/iw_cxgb4: Drop __GFP_NOFAIL
There is no reason for this __GFP_NOFAIL, none of the other routines in
this file use it, and there is an error unwind here. NOFAIL should be
reserved for special cases, not used by network drivers.
Fixes: 6a0b6174d35a ("rdma/cxgb4: Add support for kernel mode SRQ's")
Reported-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org>
Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
---
drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/qp.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/qp.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/qp.c
index 03f4c66c265946..c00a4114412694 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/qp.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/qp.c
@@ -2597,7 +2597,7 @@ static int alloc_srq_queue(struct c4iw_srq *srq, struct c4iw_dev_ucontext *uctx,
/* build fw_ri_res_wr */
wr_len = sizeof(*res_wr) + sizeof(*res);
- skb = alloc_skb(wr_len, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL);
+ skb = alloc_skb(wr_len, GFP_KERNEL);
if (!skb)
goto err_free_queue;
set_wr_txq(skb, CPL_PRIORITY_CONTROL, 0);
--
2.20.1
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
To: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org>
Cc: Steve Wise <swise@chelsio.com>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>,
Raju Rangoju <rajur@chelsio.com>,
linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] iw_cxgb4: drop check - dead code
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 14:44:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190123214415.GA20648@ziepe.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1547947633-10515-1-git-send-email-hofrat@osadl.org>
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 02:27:13AM +0100, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> The kmalloc is called with | __GFP_NOFAIL so there is no point in
> checking the return value - it either returns valid storage or it would
> hang/terminate there. But it is not possible to say if the use of
> __GFP_NOFAIL is really needed and the check should be removed or
> vice-versa (use of __GFP_NOFAIL should be only in exceptional
> cases as I understand it and alloc_srq_queue() is called in quite
> a few places)
> In either way it would need fixing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org>
> Fixes: 6a0b6174d35a ("rdma/cxgb4: Add support for kernel mode SRQ's")
> ---
As per steve's remarkes I revised this to the below and applied it to
for-next
From 4b2d4262ee2ea58df867de1928bf208795344432 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2019 02:27:13 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] RDMA/iw_cxgb4: Drop __GFP_NOFAIL
There is no reason for this __GFP_NOFAIL, none of the other routines in
this file use it, and there is an error unwind here. NOFAIL should be
reserved for special cases, not used by network drivers.
Fixes: 6a0b6174d35a ("rdma/cxgb4: Add support for kernel mode SRQ's")
Reported-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org>
Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
---
drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/qp.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/qp.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/qp.c
index 03f4c66c265946..c00a4114412694 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/qp.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/qp.c
@@ -2597,7 +2597,7 @@ static int alloc_srq_queue(struct c4iw_srq *srq, struct c4iw_dev_ucontext *uctx,
/* build fw_ri_res_wr */
wr_len = sizeof(*res_wr) + sizeof(*res);
- skb = alloc_skb(wr_len, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL);
+ skb = alloc_skb(wr_len, GFP_KERNEL);
if (!skb)
goto err_free_queue;
set_wr_txq(skb, CPL_PRIORITY_CONTROL, 0);
--
2.20.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-23 21:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-20 1:27 [PATCH RFC] iw_cxgb4: drop check - dead code Nicholas Mc Guire
2019-01-21 2:05 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-01-23 18:30 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-01-23 18:43 ` Steve Wise
2019-01-23 18:45 ` Steve Wise
2019-01-24 1:53 ` Nicholas Mc Guire
2019-01-23 21:44 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2019-01-23 21:44 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-01-23 21:48 ` Steve Wise
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190123214415.GA20648@ziepe.ca \
--to=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=dledford@redhat.com \
--cc=hofrat@osadl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rajur@chelsio.com \
--cc=swise@chelsio.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.