From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267782AbUG3Seb (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jul 2004 14:34:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267775AbUG3Sea (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jul 2004 14:34:30 -0400 Received: from zero.aec.at ([193.170.194.10]:41740 "EHLO zero.aec.at") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267781AbUG3Se3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jul 2004 14:34:29 -0400 To: Jeff Garzik cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve pci_alloc_consistent wrapper on preemptive kernels References: <2nJ3t-34a-39@gated-at.bofh.it> <2nJmP-3eq-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <2nJG8-3p6-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <2nK9b-3PM-17@gated-at.bofh.it> From: Andi Kleen Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 20:34:15 +0200 In-Reply-To: <2nK9b-3PM-17@gated-at.bofh.it> (Jeff Garzik's message of "Fri, 30 Jul 2004 20:20:09 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jeff Garzik writes: > > Certainly. Therefore, changing from GFP_ATOMIC will increase > likelihood of breakage, no? No, the atomic checks prevents that. When the code wasn't broken before on preemptive kernels it won't be broken now. -Andi