netpoll: Remove gfp parameter from __netpoll_setup
The gfp parameter was added in: commit 47be03a2 Author: Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com> Date: Fri Aug 10 01:24:37 2012 +0000 netpoll: use GFP_ATOMIC in slave_enable_netpoll() and __netpoll_setup() 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 <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> The reason for the gfp parameter was removed in: commit c4cdef9b Author: dingtianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com> Date: Tue Jul 23 15:25:27 2013 +0800 bonding: don't call slave_xxx_netpoll under spinlocks The slave_xxx_netpoll will call synchronize_rcu_bh(), so the function may schedule and sleep, it should't be called under spinlocks. bond_netpoll_setup() and bond_netpoll_cleanup() are always protected by rtnl lock, it is no need to take the read lock, as the slave list couldn't be changed outside rtnl lock. Signed-off-by: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com> Cc: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com> Cc: Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> Nothing else that calls __netpoll_setup or ndo_netpoll_setup requires a gfp paramter, so remove the gfp parameter from both of these functions making the code clearer. Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment