Sharyathi Nagesh wrote: Dave You were right it should be buffer_size instead of objectsize.(As obj_size is the size of debugging information). I modified function vm_init() and do_slab_chain_percpu_v2() to make it work with current dumps. This is just a code part to show how to fix the problem but it is not a patch as such... Please go through and let me know would it be good idea to write a new function (as you have suggested earlier) or is it possible to accommodate by calling do_slab_chain_percpu_v2() iteratively with different nodes by passing them as parameter. Changes to vm_init() if(MEMBER_EXISTS("kmem_cache","objsize")) MEMBER_OFFSET_INIT(kmem_cache_s_objsize, "kmem_cache", "objsize"); else if(MEMBER_EXISTS("kmem_cache","buffer_size")) MEMBER_OFFSET_INIT(kmem_cache_s_objsize, "kmem_cache", "buffer_size") Changes to do_slab_chain_percpu_v2() ulong start_address[MAX_NUMNODES]; if (!readmem(si->cache+OFFSET(kmem_cache_s_lists), KVADDR, &start_address[0], sizeof(ulong) * MAX_NUMNODES, "array nodelist array", RETURN_ON_ERROR)) {printf("\n Error encountered with readmem \n");exit(0);} for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUMNODES ; i++) { slab_chains[0] = start_address[i] + OFFSET(kmem_list3_slabs_partial); slab_chains[1] = start_address[i] + OFFSET(kmem_list3_slabs_full); slab_chains[2] = start_address[i] + OFFSET(kmem_list3_slabs_free); The vm_init() change is fine, but it would also need: (1) the same kind of offset initializer to handle the kmem_cache structure's "lists"-to-"nodelist" name change. (2) A new flag in vt->flags to signal this node-enhanced version of the kmem_cache struct. (3) a check of the dimension of some processor-neutral, always-there, kernel array indexed by MAX_NUMNODES, so that you can determine what MAX_NUMNODES is equal to, and then store that value in a new vm_table entry. With respect to do_slab_chain_percpu_v2(), I would prefer that it be left as is, and either (1) at the top of the function, check for your new "node-enhanced" flag, and call a new do_slab_chain_percpu_v2_nodes() function, or (2) alternatively, the two locations where do_slab_chain_percpu_v2() gets called could be qualified based upon the new flag, and the appropriate function called. In that new function, the usage of a static start_address[] array as you indicate above would have to be replaced with dynamically allocated and freed with GETBUF() and FREEBUF(), based upon the predetermined size of MAX_NUMNODES. Doing it that way leaves the current functionality untouched, makes me a lot less nervous, and should make your task a bit easier. Make sense? Dave