On 02/14/14 17:12, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > The reason I did this was that I don't have to allocate memory > unnecesarily. > If I move the allocation out of the spinlock I'll have to recheck > the list upon insertion to ensure no duplicates are present. > Upon hitting a duplicate I would have to release the memory again. > > I do agree that GFP_KERNEL is probably not the correct thing here; > so either I move it to GFP_ATOMIC or we may run into a chance of > having to release the memory again afterwards. > > Personally I'm inclined to use GFP_ATOMIC, but I'm not sure what'd > be best. > > What would you suggest here?
I have not yet had a chance to audit all code where list_lock is used. Is sleeping allowed in each function where list_lock is used ? If so, how about using a mutex instead of a spinlock ? Bart. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
