Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 09:52:37 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
Cc: cl@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] perpuc: check pcpu_first_chunk and
 pcpu_reserved_chunk to avoid handling them twice
Message-ID: <20150722135237.GJ15934@mtj.duckdns.org>
References: <1437404130-5188-1-git-send-email-bhe@redhat.com>
 <1437404130-5188-2-git-send-email-bhe@redhat.com>
 <20150721152840.GG15934@mtj.duckdns.org>
 <20150722000357.GA1834@dhcp-17-102.nay.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150722000357.GA1834@dhcp-17-102.nay.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1058
Lines: 32

Hello,

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 08:03:57AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> Yes, dyn_size can't be zero. But in pcpu_setup_first_chunk(), the local
> variable dyn_size could be zero caused by below code:
> 
> if (ai->reserved_size) {
>                 schunk->free_size = ai->reserved_size;
>                 pcpu_reserved_chunk = schunk;
>                 pcpu_reserved_chunk_limit = ai->static_size +
> ai->reserved_size;
>         } else {
>                 schunk->free_size = dyn_size;
>                 dyn_size = 0;                   /* dynamic area covered
> */
>         }
> 
> So if no reserved_size dyn_size is assigned to zero, and is checked to
> see if dchunk need be created in below code:

Hmmm... but then pcpu_reserved_chunk is NULL so there still is no
duplicate on the list, no?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/