On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 09:02:18AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Fri, 24 Oct 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > > > In this case, object from cpu1's cpu_cache should be > > different with cpu0's, so allocation would be failed. > > That is true for most object pointers unless the value is NULL. Which it > can be. But if this is the only case then the second patch + your approach > would work too.
Indeed... I missed the null value case. Your second patch + mine would fix that situation, but, I need more thinking. :) Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
