* Re: [BK-2.5] Update arm implementation of DMA API to include GFP_
@ 2003-01-14 15:41 James Bottomley
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: James Bottomley @ 2003-01-14 15:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David S. Miller; +Cc: James.Bottomley, linux-kernel
James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com said:
> Is this really safe? Maybe ARM needs to use GFP_ATOMIC all the time
> for a specific reason, such as where and how it maps the cpu side
> mappings of the memory?
According to Russell King, yes.
The PA-RISC one should also be correct. Actually, to be honest, there's a
longstanding issue in the pa-risc code where we can potentially allocate a
page table using GFP_KERNEL in pci_alloc_consistent() when we obtain the
mapping resources. I can argue that we never go down this path in practice,
but it does make GFP_ATOMIC allocations look unsafe on the platform.
James
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2003-01-14 15:33 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-01-14 15:41 [BK-2.5] Update arm implementation of DMA API to include GFP_ James Bottomley
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).