[PATCH] uml: avoid malloc to sleep in atomic sections
Ugly trick to help make malloc not sleeping - we can't do anything else. But
this is not yet optimal, since spinlock don't trigger in_atomic() when
preemption is disabled.
Also, even if ugly, this was already used in one place, and was even more
bogus. Fix it.
Signed-off-by: Paolo 'Blaisorblade' Giarrusso <blaisorblade@yahoo.it>
Cc: Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
diff --git a/arch/um/kernel/process_kern.c b/arch/um/kernel/process_kern.c
index e167cf0..3113cab 100644
--- a/arch/um/kernel/process_kern.c
+++ b/arch/um/kernel/process_kern.c
@@ -287,17 +287,27 @@
void *um_kmalloc(int size)
{
- return(kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL));
+ return kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
}
void *um_kmalloc_atomic(int size)
{
- return(kmalloc(size, GFP_ATOMIC));
+ return kmalloc(size, GFP_ATOMIC);
}
void *um_vmalloc(int size)
{
- return(vmalloc(size));
+ return vmalloc(size);
+}
+
+void *um_vmalloc_atomic(int size)
+{
+ return __vmalloc(size, GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_HIGHMEM, PAGE_KERNEL);
+}
+
+int __cant_sleep(void) {
+ return in_atomic() || irqs_disabled() || in_interrupt();
+ /* Is in_interrupt() really needed? */
}
unsigned long get_fault_addr(void)
@@ -369,11 +379,6 @@
return(0);
}
-int um_in_interrupt(void)
-{
- return(in_interrupt());
-}
-
int cpu(void)
{
return(current_thread->cpu);