On Jul 17, 2008, at 10:27 AM, Kim Phillips wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 07:26:14 -0500
Kumar Gala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jul 17, 2008, at 7:17 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 06:33:45PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Jul 16, 2008, at 6:22 PM, Kim Phillips wrote:
use GFP_ATOMIC when necessary; use atomic_t when allocating
submit_count.
why?
You mean why are atomics required? Yes that is a good question.
Yep. the commit message isn't explaining why, just what :)
In honouring requests that don't have the CRYPTO_TFM_REQ_MAY_SLEEP
set,
afaict, it's the standard non-wait variant GFP that drivers use (see
the ixp4xx driver for e.g.).
so GFP_ATOMIC and atomic_t aren't related. I can understand the need
for GFP_ATOMIC, but I don't get why something needs to be declared
atomic_t.
- k
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
