Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+1\/6\]\s+ipvs\:\s+timeout\s+tables\s+do\s+not\s+need\s+GFP

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+1\/6\]\s+ipvs\:\s+timeout\s+tables\s+do\s+not\s+need\s+GFP_ATOMIC\s+allocation\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [PATCH 1/6] ipvs: timeout tables do not need GFP_ATOMIC allocation (score: 1): Author: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 21:32:32 +0900; Thanks, I have applied these to my ipvs-next tree which I will push to kernel.org shortly. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in the body of a message to majordom; /html/lvs-devel/2012-04/msg00085.html (9,912 bytes)
2. Re: [PATCH 1/6] ipvs: timeout tables do not need GFP_ATOMIC allocation (score: 1): Author: "Hans Schillstrom" <hans@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 22:14:19 +0200 (CEST); Hello All 6 patches look fine to me, and are all called from process context Signed-off-by: Hans Schillstrom <hans@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-de; /html/lvs-devel/2012-04/msg00042.html (10,647 bytes)
3. [PATCH 1/6] ipvs: timeout tables do not need GFP_ATOMIC allocation (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 16:49:37 +0300; They are called only on initialization. Signed-off-by: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx> -- net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_proto.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/netfil; /html/lvs-devel/2012-04/msg00033.html (10,371 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]