On Monday 12 October 2015 23:20:25 John Garry wrote:
> @@ -804,6 +818,16 @@ static irqreturn_t int_phyup_v1_hw(int irq_no, void *p)
> phy->identify.target_port_protocols =
> SAS_PROTOCOL_SMP;
>
> + wq = kmalloc(sizeof(*wq), GFP_ATOMIC);
> + if (!wq)
> + goto end;
> +
> + wq->event = PHYUP;
> + wq->hisi_hba = hisi_hba;
> + wq->phy_no = phy_no;
> +
> + INIT_WORK(&wq->work_struct, hisi_sas_wq_process);
> + queue_work(hisi_hba->wq, &wq->work_struct);
>
> end:
> hisi_sas_phy_write32(hisi_hba, phy_no, CHL_INT2,
>
While rereading some other parts of the code, I stumbled over this piece.
You should generally not allocate work structs dynamically. Why not embed
the work struct inside of the phy structure and then just queue that?
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
