On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 03:21:21PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > On Tue, 1 Jul 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > > > node isn't changed, so we don't need to retreive this structure > > everytime we move the object. Maybe compiler do this optimization, > > but making it explicitly is better. > > > > Qualifying the pointer as const would be even more explicit.
Hello, So what you recommend is something likes below? - struct kmem_cache_node *n = get_node(cachep, node); + struct kmem_cache_node * const n = get_node(cachep, node); I don't have seen this form of code protecting pointer itself in mm. Instead, I have seen 'const struct kmem_cache_node *n' which protects memory pointed by pointer. But this case isn't that case. Am I missing something? > > > Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <c...@linux.com> > > Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo....@lge.com> > > Acked-by: David Rientjes <rient...@google.com> Thank you! -- 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/
