From a8779ec1c5e60548b7b661a8d74a8cecf7775690 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Eric W. Biederman" Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 15:36:38 -0700 Subject: netpoll: Remove gfp parameter from __netpoll_setup The gfp parameter was added in: commit 47be03a28cc6c80e3aa2b3e8ed6d960ff0c5c0af Author: Amerigo Wang 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 Cc: "David S. Miller" Reported-by: Dan Carpenter Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet Signed-off-by: Cong Wang Signed-off-by: David S. Miller The reason for the gfp parameter was removed in: commit c4cdef9b7183159c23c7302aaf270d64c549f557 Author: dingtianhong 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 Cc: Jay Vosburgh Cc: Andy Gospodarek Signed-off-by: David S. Miller 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" Signed-off-by: David S. Miller --- net/bridge/br_if.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'net/bridge/br_if.c') diff --git a/net/bridge/br_if.c b/net/bridge/br_if.c index 54d207d3a31c..5262b8617eb9 100644 --- a/net/bridge/br_if.c +++ b/net/bridge/br_if.c @@ -366,7 +366,7 @@ int br_add_if(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_device *dev) if (err) goto err2; - err = br_netpoll_enable(p, GFP_KERNEL); + err = br_netpoll_enable(p); if (err) goto err3; -- cgit