From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Quentin Lambert Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ide: replace GFP_ATOMIC by GFP_KERNEL Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 16:51:33 +0200 Message-ID: <552691F5.9010205@gmail.com> References: <1428579988-10167-1-git-send-email-lambert.quentin@gmail.com> <1428579988-10167-3-git-send-email-lambert.quentin@gmail.com> <20150409123633.GN10964@mwanda> <55268DCB.3010201@gmail.com> <20150409145035.GC16501@mwanda> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150409145035.GC16501@mwanda> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Dan Carpenter Cc: "David S. Miller" , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On 09/04/2015 16:50, Dan Carpenter wrote: > Sorry, my last email was bad. > > Splitting patches into logical parts is a bit tricky. Let me try > explain better. > > Every patch should sort of make sense on its own. In the original code > it's using GFP_ATOMIC but that's because the original API was bad and > we had no choice. In the 1/1 patch we're using GFP_ATOMIC explicitly > by choice and it's wrong. In patch 2/2 we fix this problem but we > shouldn't introduce bad code even if we fix it in later patches. ok thanks > > regards, > dan carpenter >