From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f50.google.com (mail-pa0-f50.google.com [209.85.220.50]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FB626B0069 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 03:53:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f50.google.com with SMTP id eu11so4957983pac.37 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 00:53:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lgeamrelo01.lge.com (lgeamrelo01.lge.com. [156.147.1.125]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id r2si1790368pdh.33.2014.10.27.00.53.11 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 00:53:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:54:26 +0900 From: Joonsoo Kim Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] [RFC] slub: Fastpath optimization (especially for RT) Message-ID: <20141027075426.GE23379@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> References: <20141022155517.560385718@linux.com> <20141023080942.GA7598@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> <20141024045630.GD15243@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: akpm@linuxfoundation.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , linux-mm@kvack.org, penberg@kernel.org, iamjoonsoo@lge.com On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 09:02:18AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Fri, 24 Oct 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > > > In this case, object from cpu1's cpu_cache should be > > different with cpu0's, so allocation would be failed. > > That is true for most object pointers unless the value is NULL. Which it > can be. But if this is the only case then the second patch + your approach > would work too. Indeed... I missed the null value case. Your second patch + mine would fix that situation, but, I need more thinking. :) Thanks. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org