On Monday 04 February 2002 01:18, David Brownell wrote:
> GFP_* is excessively cryptic, and it doesn't account for
> the slightly more meaningful SLAB_* synonyms ... :)
OK, I'll change.
> Actually, since td_alloc() is always SLAB_ATOMIC
> (artifact of locking structure) it won't need to change
>
GFP_* is excessively cryptic, and it doesn't account for
the slightly more meaningful SLAB_* synonyms ... :)
Actually, since td_alloc() is always SLAB_ATOMIC
(artifact of locking structure) it won't need to change
in these patches -- though if that locking ever gets
improved, that should change.
On Sunday 03 February 2002 20:17, David Brownell wrote:
> Roman --
>
> > hm, I think the allocation of the TDs has to be changed too.
>
> Yes. And I'd rather see a more mnemonic name than "gfp",
> perhaps "mem_flags" since that's their role.
Doesn't gfp remind you of GFP_KERNEL, GFP_ATOMIC ... ?
On Sunday 03 February 2002 18:19, Roman Weissgaerber wrote:
> Hi,
>
> hm, I think the allocation of the TDs has to be changed too.
I am overlooking something. Could you point me at a function ?
Regards
Oliver
___
[EMAIL PROTECT
Roman --
> hm, I think the allocation of the TDs has to be changed too.
Yes. And I'd rather see a more mnemonic name than "gfp",
perhaps "mem_flags" since that's their role.
- Dave
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
Hi,
hm, I think the allocation of the TDs has to be changed too.
regards
Roman
Oliver Neukum wrote:
>Hi,
>
>this is for usb-ohci.c
>
> Regards
> Oliver
>
>--- drivers/usb/usb-ohci.c.pre Sun Feb 3 10:28:31 2002
>+++ drivers/usb/usb-ohci.c Sun Feb 3 10:39:56 2002
>@@ -
