On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 12:56:16 +0200, 'Joerg Roedel' wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 09:55:30AM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> > Oh, this is a valid point, but it was more a nitpick about the coding
> > style. Single path error handling (with goto) is widely used in the kernel
> > in cases when more
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 12:56:16 +0200, 'Joerg Roedel' wrote:
On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 09:55:30AM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Oh, this is a valid point, but it was more a nitpick about the coding
style. Single path error handling (with goto) is widely used in the kernel
in cases when more than
On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 09:55:30AM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Oh, this is a valid point, but it was more a nitpick about the coding
> style. Single path error handling (with goto) is widely used in the kernel
> in cases when more than one thing has to be undone and so I suggested this
> method
On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 09:55:30AM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Oh, this is a valid point, but it was more a nitpick about the coding
style. Single path error handling (with goto) is widely used in the kernel
in cases when more than one thing has to be undone and so I suggested this
method of
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 11:35:20 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> On Friday 09 of August 2013 17:51:56 Cho KyongHo wrote:
> > On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 09:55:30 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> > > Hi KyongHo,
> > >
> > > On Friday 09 of August 2013 14:58:49 Cho KyongHo wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 16:00:18
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 11:35:20 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Friday 09 of August 2013 17:51:56 Cho KyongHo wrote:
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 09:55:30 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi KyongHo,
On Friday 09 of August 2013 14:58:49 Cho KyongHo wrote:
On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 16:00:18 +0200, Tomasz Figa
On Friday 09 of August 2013 17:51:56 Cho KyongHo wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 09:55:30 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> > Hi KyongHo,
> >
> > On Friday 09 of August 2013 14:58:49 Cho KyongHo wrote:
> > > On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 16:00:18 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> > > > On Thursday 08 of August 2013
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 09:55:30 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi KyongHo,
>
> On Friday 09 of August 2013 14:58:49 Cho KyongHo wrote:
> > On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 16:00:18 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> > > On Thursday 08 of August 2013 18:38:04 Cho KyongHo wrote:
> > > > Since kmalloc() does not guarantee
Hi KyongHo,
On Friday 09 of August 2013 14:58:49 Cho KyongHo wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 16:00:18 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> > On Thursday 08 of August 2013 18:38:04 Cho KyongHo wrote:
> > > Since kmalloc() does not guarantee that the allignment of 1KiB when
> > > it
> > > allocates 1KiB, it is
On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 16:00:18 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> On Thursday 08 of August 2013 18:38:04 Cho KyongHo wrote:
> > Since kmalloc() does not guarantee that the allignment of 1KiB when it
> > allocates 1KiB, it is required to allocate lv2 page table from own
> > slab that guarantees alignment of
On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 16:00:18 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Thursday 08 of August 2013 18:38:04 Cho KyongHo wrote:
Since kmalloc() does not guarantee that the allignment of 1KiB when it
allocates 1KiB, it is required to allocate lv2 page table from own
slab that guarantees alignment of 1KiB
Hi KyongHo,
On Friday 09 of August 2013 14:58:49 Cho KyongHo wrote:
On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 16:00:18 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Thursday 08 of August 2013 18:38:04 Cho KyongHo wrote:
Since kmalloc() does not guarantee that the allignment of 1KiB when
it
allocates 1KiB, it is required to
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 09:55:30 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi KyongHo,
On Friday 09 of August 2013 14:58:49 Cho KyongHo wrote:
On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 16:00:18 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Thursday 08 of August 2013 18:38:04 Cho KyongHo wrote:
Since kmalloc() does not guarantee that the
On Friday 09 of August 2013 17:51:56 Cho KyongHo wrote:
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 09:55:30 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi KyongHo,
On Friday 09 of August 2013 14:58:49 Cho KyongHo wrote:
On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 16:00:18 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Thursday 08 of August 2013 18:38:04 Cho
On Thursday 08 of August 2013 18:38:04 Cho KyongHo wrote:
> Since kmalloc() does not guarantee that the allignment of 1KiB when it
> allocates 1KiB, it is required to allocate lv2 page table from own
> slab that guarantees alignment of 1KiB
>
> Signed-off-by: Cho KyongHo
> ---
>
Since kmalloc() does not guarantee that the allignment of 1KiB when it
allocates 1KiB, it is required to allocate lv2 page table from own
slab that guarantees alignment of 1KiB
Signed-off-by: Cho KyongHo
---
drivers/iommu/exynos-iommu.c | 24
1 files changed, 20
Since kmalloc() does not guarantee that the allignment of 1KiB when it
allocates 1KiB, it is required to allocate lv2 page table from own
slab that guarantees alignment of 1KiB
Signed-off-by: Cho KyongHo pullip@samsung.com
---
drivers/iommu/exynos-iommu.c | 24
1
On Thursday 08 of August 2013 18:38:04 Cho KyongHo wrote:
Since kmalloc() does not guarantee that the allignment of 1KiB when it
allocates 1KiB, it is required to allocate lv2 page table from own
slab that guarantees alignment of 1KiB
Signed-off-by: Cho KyongHo pullip@samsung.com
---
18 matches
Mail list logo