On 19/04/17 12:30 PM, Dan Williams wrote: > Letting others users do the container_of() arrangement means that > struct page_map needs to become public and move into struct > dev_pagemap directly. Ah, yes, I got a bit turned around by that and failed to notice that page_map and dev_pagemap are different. Why is it that dev_pagemap contains pretty much the exact same information as page_map? The only thing gained that I can see is that the struct resource gains const protection... > ...I think that encapsulation loss is worth it for the gain of clearly > separating the HMM-case from the base case. Agreed. Logan
