Andi Kleen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> James Bottomley <[email protected]> writes:
>
> In general this seems like a lot of code for a simple problem.
> It might be simpler to just put the work structure into the parent
> object and do the workqueue unconditionally
>
That apparently would have really bad performance problems. If we're
!in_interrupt() we want to do the work synchronously.
But yes, if we can embed the work_struct inside the structure which the
callback will operate on
> > + if (unlikely(!wqw)) {
> > + printk(KERN_ERR "Failed to allocate memory\n");
> > + WARN_ON(1);
>
> WARN_ON for GFP_ATOMIC failure is bad. It is not really a bug.
it will solve this problem. (And I think is is a problem: if the
allocation fails, we leak things?)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
