Re: [PATCH v3] staging: r8188eu: Use kzalloc() with GFP_ATOMIC in atomic context

Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-11-07T13:29:50Z

On Sun, Nov 07, 2021 at 02:15:59PM +0100, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> On Sunday, November 7, 2021 1:38:35 PM CET Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 07, 2021 at 12:43:51PM +0100, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > > On Monday, November 1, 2021 8:18:47 PM CET Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > > > Use the GFP_ATOMIC flag of kzalloc() with two memory allocation in
> > > > report_del_sta_event(). This function is called while holding
> spinlocks,
> > > > therefore it is not allowed to sleep. With the GFP_ATOMIC type flag,
> the
> > > > allocation is high priority and must not sleep.
> > > >
> > > > This issue is detected by Smatch which emits the following warning:
> > > > "drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c:6848
> report_del_sta_event()
> > > > warn: sleeping in atomic context".
> > > >
> > > > After the change, the post-commit hook output the following message:
> > > > "CHECK: Prefer kzalloc(sizeof(*pcmd_obj)...) over
> > > > kzalloc(sizeof(struct cmd_obj)...)".
> > > >
> > > > According to the above "CHECK", use the preferred style in the first
> > > > kzalloc().
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: 79f712ea994d ("staging: r8188eu: Remove wrappers for kalloc()
> and
> > > kzalloc()")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
>
> > > > [...]
>
> > > Please let me know if there is something that prevents this patch to be
> > > applied. I have no problem in changing / adding whatever it is needed.
> >
> > Nothing needs to be done, I am waiting for 5.16-rc1 to be released
> > before I pick up this patch, and others that will be targeted for
> > 5.16-final. Only then will I queue them up, as the automated email you
> > should have gotten when you submitted the patch said would happen.
> >
> > Just relax, there is no rush here :)
> >
>
> Oh, sorry Greg. There must be something that I haven't understand about the
> development process... :(
>
> Obviously I agree that there is no rush here :)
>
> As I said, this morning I read git log and saw patches that seemed more
> recent; thus I thought that was the case to ask. I just (wrongly) thought
> that the v3 of the patch got unnoticed or dropped because of some requests
> that I had missed.

Be sure to notice what branch commits are being applied to. There are
different branches for a reason :)

thanks,

greg k-h