On Sat, 28 Jul 2012, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > Subject and commit log are changed from v1. That looks a bit better. But the changelog could use more cleanup and clearer expression. > @@ -2490,25 +2492,17 @@ static void __slab_free(struct kmem_cache *s, struct page *page, > return; > } > > + if (unlikely(!new.inuse && n->nr_partial > s->min_partial)) > + goto slab_empty; > + So we can never encounter a empty slab that was frozen before? Really? Remote frees can decrement inuse again. All objects of a slab frozen on one cpu could be allocated while the slab is still frozen. The unfreezing requires slab_alloc to encounter a NULL pointer after all. A remote processor could obtain a pointer to all these objects and free them. The code here would cause an unfreeze action. Another alloc on the first processor would cause a *second* unfreeze action on a page that was freed. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>