Hi Bart,
On 1/29/19, 2:30 PM, "Giridhar Malavali" <[email protected]> wrote: On 1/25/19, 7:55 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of Bart Van Assche" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: External Email On Thu, 2019-01-24 at 23:23 -0800, Himanshu Madhani wrote: > From: Giridhar Malavali <[email protected]> > > This patch fixes SRB allocation flag from GFP_KERNEL to GFP_ATOMIC, to > prevent sleeping in IRQ context > > Signed-off-by: Giridhar Malavali <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Himanshu Madhani <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c > index aa72e8316533..3bb4fa97e40a 100644 > --- a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c > +++ b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c > @@ -1829,7 +1829,7 @@ qla24xx_async_abort_cmd(srb_t *cmd_sp, bool wait) > int rval = QLA_FUNCTION_FAILED; > > sp = qla2xxx_get_qpair_sp(cmd_sp->vha, cmd_sp->qpair, cmd_sp->fcport, > - GFP_KERNEL); > + GFP_ATOMIC); > if (!sp) > goto done; Is this change necessary because this function can be called from inside a timer callback function? Is that callback function qla2x00_sp_timeout()? If so, have you considered to modify that function such that it schedules the work it has to do? Would that be sufficient to avoid that GFP_KERNEL has to be changed into GFP_ATOMIC in qla24xx_async_abort_cmd()? yes, qla2x00_sp_timeout() is the function. Considering that this happens very rare I did not consider scheduling this further. Thanks, Bart. Let us know if there are any other comments? Thanks, Himanshu
