On Mon, 2 Jun 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > There are some other places that we can replace such as get_slabinfo(), > leaks_show(), etc.. If you want to replace for_each_online_node() > with for_each_kmem_cache_node, please also replace them. Ok we can do that. > Meanwhile, I think that this change is not good for readability. There > are many for_each_online_node() usage that we can't replace, so I don't > think this abstraction is really helpful clean-up. Possibly, using > for_each_online_node() consistently would be more readable than this > change. What really matters is that we have a management structure kmem_cache_node for the relevant node. There are portions during bootstrap when kmem_cache_node is not allocated. Using this function also avoids race conditions during node bringup and teardown. -- 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>