Hello,
On 11/19/2012 11:48 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 19:18:46 -0500 Jason Cooper jason@lakedaemon.net wrote:
I've added the maintainers for mm/*. Hopefully they can let us know if this is good for v3.8...
As Marek has inexplicably put this patch into linux-next via his tree, we don't appear to be getting a say in the matter!
I've just put this patch to linux-next via my dma-mapping tree to give it some testing asap to check if other changes to arm dma-mapping are required or not.
The patch looks good to me. That open-coded wait loop predates the creation of bitkeeper tree(!) but doesn't appear to be needed. There will perhaps be some behavioural changes observable for GFP_KERNEL callers as dma_pool_alloc() will no longer dip into page reserves but I see nothing special about dma_pool_alloc() which justifies doing that anyway.
The patch makes pool->waitq and its manipulation obsolete, but it failed to remove all that stuff.
Right, I missed that part, I will update it asap.
The changelog failed to describe the problem which Soren reported. That should be included, and as the problem sounds fairly serious we might decide to backport the fix into -stable kernels.
Ok, I will extend the changelog.
dma_pool_alloc()'s use of a local "struct dma_page *page" is distressing - MM developers very much expect a local called "page" to have type "struct page *". But that's a separate issue.
I will prepare a separate patch cleaning it. I was also a bit surprised by such naming scheme, but it is probably related to the fact that this come has not been touched much since a very ancient times.
As this patch is already in -next and is stuck there for two more weeks I can't (or at least won't) merge this patch, so I can't help with any of the above.
I will fix both issues in the next version of the patch. Would like to merge it to your tree or should I keep it in my dma-mapping tree?
Best regards