Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] netpoll: use GFP_ATOMIC in slave_enable_netpoll() and __netpoll_setup()

From: Cong Wang <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 10:28:51 +0800

On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 17:20 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 22:23 +0800, Cong Wang wrote:
> > slave_enable_netpoll() and __netpoll_setup() may be called
> > with read_lock() held, so should use GFP_ATOMIC to allocate
> > memory. Eric suggested to pass gfp flags to __netpoll_setup().
> > 
> > Cc: Eric Dumazet <[email-masked]>
> > Cc: "David S. Miller" <[email-masked]>
> > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <[email-masked]>
> > Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <[email-masked]>
> > ---
> 
> You based this on net-next, but didnt add the net-next suffix in your
> [PATCH ...] description.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <[email-masked]>
> 

Oh, it is default, isn't it? :-D Anyway, I will add it the next time
when I send network patches.

Thanks!