Sorry for a late reply, I just found this because of my bad email client. > There is another unmarked access of "slab->slabs" in the show_slab_objects(), > which you can change too. Yes, I think show_slab_objects() has a similar situation. Should I consider to submit a V2 patch for this? > I'm not sure that it's really safe to access "slab->slabs" here without any protection? > Although it should be no problem in practice, alternative choice maybe putting partial > slabs count in the kmem_cache_cpu struct. I think it is ok, because it seems that slab->slabs in slub_percpu_partial and show_slab_objects() are just used for showing some infomation. I noticed Paul summarized some of these strategies in access-marking.txt[1] Quote from it: "Use of the data_race() Macro ---------------------------- Here are some situations where data_race() should be used instead of READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE(): 1. Data-racy loads from shared variables whose values are used only for diagnostic purposes. 2. Data-racy reads whose values are checked against marked reload. 3. Reads whose values feed into error-tolerant heuristics. 4. Writes setting values that feed into error-tolerant heuristics. " Thanks, Linke [1]https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/tools/memory-model/Documentation/access-marking.txt
