From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267767AbUG3SI1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jul 2004 14:08:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267771AbUG3SI0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jul 2004 14:08:26 -0400 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:989 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267769AbUG3SIY (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jul 2004 14:08:24 -0400 Message-ID: <410A8E7D.2030009@pobox.com> Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 14:07:57 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040510 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andi Kleen CC: akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve pci_alloc_consistent wrapper on preemptive kernels References: <20040730190227.29913e23.ak@suse.de> <410A826C.4000508@pobox.com> <20040730194304.2c27f48c.ak@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20040730194304.2c27f48c.ak@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andi Kleen wrote: > On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 13:16:28 -0400 > Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > >>1) Changing from GFP_ATOMIC to 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? Jeff