On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 04:32:24PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > > Now with table_size argument, the first arg is no more the shift value, > rather it is index into the array. Hence i changed the variable name. I > will split that patch to make it easy for review. OK, so you're saying that the simple relation between index and the size of the objects in PGT_CACHE(index) no longer holds. That worries me, because now, what guarantees that two callers won't use the same index value with two different sizes? And what guarantees that we won't have two callers using different index values but the same size (which wouldn't be a disaster but would be a waste of space)? I think it would be preferable to keep the relation between shift and the size of the objects and just arrange to use a different shift value for the pmd objects when you need to. Paul. -- 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>