From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D71CA8D0039 for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2011 03:07:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: 17 Mar 2011 03:07:05 -0400 Message-ID: <20110317070705.15100.qmail@science.horizon.com> From: "George Spelvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] mm/slub: Factor out some common code. In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: linux@horizon.com, penberg@kernel.org Cc: herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mpm@selenic.com, penberg@cs.helsinki.fi, rientjes@google.com > I certainly don't but I'd still like to ask you to change it to > 'unsigned long'. That's a Linux kernel idiom and we're not going to > change the whole kernel. Damn, and I just prepared the following patch. Should I, instead, do --- a/include/linux/slab_def.h +++ b/include/linux/slab_def.h @@ -62,5 +62,5 @@ struct kmem_cache { /* 3) touched by every alloc & free from the backend */ - unsigned int flags; /* constant flags */ + unsigned long flags; /* constant flags */ unsigned int num; /* # of objs per slab */ ... because the original slab code uses an unsigned int. To fix it the other way (for SLAB_ flags only) is a patch like this: