On Fri, 17 Aug 2012, JoonSoo Kim wrote: > In case of !object (available = page->objects - page->inuse;), > "available" means the number of objects in cpu slab. Right because we do not have allocated any cpu partial slabs yet. > In this time, we don't have any cpu partial slab, so "available" imply > the number of objects available to the cpu without locking. > This is what we want. > > > But, see another "available" (available = put_cpu_partial(s, page, 0);). > > This "available" doesn't include the number of objects in cpu slab. Ok. Now I see. > Therefore, I think a minor fix is needed for consistency. > Isn't it reasonable? Yup it is. Let me look over your patch again. Ok so use meaningful names for the variables to clarify the issue. cpu_objects and partial_objects or so? Then the check would be as you proposed in the last message if (cpu_objects + partial_objects < s->cpu_partial ... -- 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>