Re: [PATCH] IB/sa: replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC

2015-11-13 Thread Saurabh Sengar
On Fri, 13 Nov 2015 at 10:47:52 +, Wan, Kaike wrote: > I don't think so. > The following patch has rendered this patch unnecessary: > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/7526811/ > Kaike OK, could you please use "Reported-by" tag of my name in your patch Regards, Saurabh -- To unsubscribe fro

RE: [PATCH] IB/sa: replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC

2015-11-13 Thread Wan, Kaike
Friday, November 13, 2015 2:42 AM > To: Weiny, Ira; Wan, Kaike > Cc: Hefty, Sean; hal.rosenst...@gmail.com; dledf...@redhat.com; linux- > r...@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] IB/sa: replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC > > On Wed, 28 Oct 2015

Re: [PATCH] IB/sa: replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC

2015-11-12 Thread Saurabh Sengar
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 at 04:30:10 +, Weiny, Ira wrote: > Until we can remove the spinlock the current proposed patch should be applied > in the interim. Sorry for the noise before. > Reviewed-By: Ira Weiny Hi, is this patch expected to be applied ? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send th

RE: [PATCH] IB/sa: replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC

2015-10-27 Thread Weiny, Ira
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 06:56:50PM +, Wan, Kaike wrote: > > > > I do wonder if it is a good idea to call ib_nl_send_msg with a > > > spinlock held though.. Would be nice to see that go away. > > > > We have to hold the lock to protect against a race condition that a > > quick response wil

Re: [PATCH] IB/sa: replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC

2015-10-27 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 06:56:50PM +, Wan, Kaike wrote: > > I do wonder if it is a good idea to call ib_nl_send_msg with a spinlock held > > though.. Would be nice to see that go away. > > We have to hold the lock to protect against a race condition that a > quick response will try to free t

RE: [PATCH] IB/sa: replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC

2015-10-27 Thread Wan, Kaike
Kaike; linux- > r...@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] IB/sa: replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 02:12:36PM -0400, ira.weiny wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 09:17:40PM +0530, Saurabh Sengar wrote: > > > replace GFP_

Re: [PATCH] IB/sa: replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC

2015-10-27 Thread ira.weiny
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:16:52PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 02:12:36PM -0400, ira.weiny wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 09:17:40PM +0530, Saurabh Sengar wrote: > > > replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC, as code while holding a spinlock > > > should be atomic > > > G

Re: [PATCH] IB/sa: replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC

2015-10-27 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 02:12:36PM -0400, ira.weiny wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 09:17:40PM +0530, Saurabh Sengar wrote: > > replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC, as code while holding a spinlock > > should be atomic > > GFP_KERNEL may sleep and can cause deadlock, where as GFP_ATOMIC may > > fai

Re: [PATCH] IB/sa: replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC

2015-10-27 Thread ira.weiny
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 09:17:40PM +0530, Saurabh Sengar wrote: > replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC, as code while holding a spinlock > should be atomic > GFP_KERNEL may sleep and can cause deadlock, where as GFP_ATOMIC may > fail but certainly avoids deadlock Great catch. Thanks! However, gfp_

[PATCH] IB/sa: replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC

2015-10-27 Thread Saurabh Sengar
replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC, as code while holding a spinlock should be atomic GFP_KERNEL may sleep and can cause deadlock, where as GFP_ATOMIC may fail but certainly avoids deadlock Signed-off-by: Saurabh Sengar --- drivers/infiniband/core/sa_query.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertion