On Tue, 13 Nov 2012, Xi Wang wrote:
> diff --git a/mm/dmapool.c b/mm/dmapool.c
> index c5ab33b..bf7f8f0 100644
> --- a/mm/dmapool.c
> +++ b/mm/dmapool.c
> @@ -135,6 +135,7 @@ struct dma_pool *dma_pool_create(const char *name, struct
> device *dev,
> {
> struct dma_pool *retval;
> size_t allocation;
> + int node;
>
> if (align == 0) {
> align = 1;
> @@ -159,7 +160,9 @@ struct dma_pool *dma_pool_create(const char *name, struct
> device *dev,
> return NULL;
> }
>
> - retval = kmalloc_node(sizeof(*retval), GFP_KERNEL, dev_to_node(dev));
> + node = WARN_ON(!dev) ? -1 : dev_to_node(dev);
> +
> + retval = kmalloc_node(sizeof(*retval), GFP_KERNEL, node);
> if (!retval)
> return retval;
>
Begs the question why we don't just do something like this generically?
---
diff --git a/include/linux/device.h b/include/linux/device.h
--- a/include/linux/device.h
+++ b/include/linux/device.h
@@ -718,7 +718,7 @@ int dev_set_name(struct device *dev, const char *name, ...);
#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
static inline int dev_to_node(struct device *dev)
{
- return dev->numa_node;
+ return WARN_ON(!dev) ? NUMA_NO_NODE : dev->numa_node;
}
static inline void set_dev_node(struct device *dev, int node)
{
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
