Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > One example is mm/memory-failure.c:memory_failure(). It starts with a > raw pfn, uses that to get at the `struct page', then starts playing > around with it. Will that code still work correctly when some of the > page's fields have been overlayed with slab-specific contents? As long as PageSlab() works correctly memory_failure should be happy. > > This issue hasn't been well thought through. Given a random struct > page, there isn't any protocol to determine what it actually *is*. > It's a plain old variant record, but it lacks the agreed-upon tag field > which tells users which variant is currently in use. PageSlab() should work for this right? For the generic case it may not though. -Andi -- ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only -- 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>