On Sun, 3 Jun 2007, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> first, can a call to __get_free_pages to allocate DMA-able memory
> omit specifying either of GFP_KERNEL or GFP_ATOMIC? love's book on
> kernel development strongly suggests you need to specify one or the
> other, but there are a few instances in the tree like this:
Sure that seems to be equivalent to GFP_ATOMIC with no access to emergency
pool memory.
> and, second, i only noticed this as i was going to submit a short
> patch to replace __get_free_pages calls for DMA-able memory with the
> existing equivalent macro __get_dma_pages. is that still considered a
> worthwhile cleanup? there's not that many examples of it, and it
> would just make things consistent.
Sure.
-
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]
