On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 10:23:46PM -0700, Jesse Brandeburg wrote: > On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 09:38:42 +0200 > Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jail...@wanadoo.fr> wrote: > > > There is no good reason to use GFP_ATOMIC here. Other memory allocations > > are performed with GFP_KERNEL (see other 'dma_alloc_coherent()' below and > > 'kzalloc()' in 'et131x_rx_dma_memory_alloc()') > > > > Use GFP_KERNEL which should be enough. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jail...@wanadoo.fr> > > Sure, but generally I'd say GFP_ATOMIC is ok if you're in an init path > and you can afford to have the allocation thread sleep while memory is > being found by the kernel.
That's not what GFP_ATOMIC means. GFP_ATOMIC _will not_ sleep. GFP_KERNEL will.
