On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 06 Sep 2016 09:49:47 -0700 Dan Williams <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Now that track_pfn_insert() is no longer used in the DAX path, it no >> longer needs to comprehend pfn_t values. > > What's the benefit in this? A pfn *should* have type pfn_t, shouldn't > it? Confused.
It should when there's extra information to consider. I don't mind leaving it as is, but all the other usages of pfn_t are considering or passing through the PFN_DEV and PFN_MAP flags. So, it's a courtesy to the reader saying "you don't need to worry about pfn_t defined behavior here, this is just a plain old physical address >> PAGE_SHIFT"
