On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 01:47:29PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote: > On Mon, 15 Feb 2010, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > > > @@ -1577,6 +1595,8 @@ void __init kmem_cache_init_late(void) > > > > */ > > > > register_cpu_notifier(&cpucache_notifier); > > > > > > > > + hotplug_memory_notifier(slab_memory_callback, SLAB_CALLBACK_PRI); > > > > + > > > > > > Only needed for CONFIG_NUMA, but there's no side-effects for UMA kernels > > > since status_change_nid will always be -1. > > > > Compiler doesn't know that, though. > > > > Right, setting up a memory hotplug callback for UMA kernels here isn't > necessary although slab_node_prepare() would have to be defined > unconditionally. I made this suggestion in my review of the patchset's > initial version but it was left unchanged, so I'd rather see it included > than otherwise stall out. This could always be enclosed in > #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA later just like the callback in slub does. It's not such a big burden to annotate critical core code with such things. Otherwise someone else ends up eventually doing it. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>