From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx173.postini.com [74.125.245.173]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 51E336B005A for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:53:18 -0400 (EDT) From: "Luck, Tony" Subject: RE: [PATCH] mm/slub: fix a BUG_ON() when offlining a memory node and CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG is on Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:53:16 +0000 Message-ID: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F1936AB66@ORSMSX104.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <1342543816-10853-1-git-send-email-jiang.liu@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Christoph Lameter , Jiang Liu Cc: Pekka Enberg , Matt Mackall , Mel Gorman , Jianguo Wu , Jiang Liu , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , KOSAKI Motohiro , David Rientjes , Minchan Kim , Keping Chen , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" > This suggests that a call to early_kmem_cache_node_alloc was not needed > because the per node structure already existed. Lets fix that instead. Perhaps by just having one API for users to call? It seems odd to force use= rs to figure out whether they are called before some magic time during boot and use the "early...()" call. Shouldn't we hide this sort of detail from t= hem? -Tony -- 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