Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> To repeat what I said in IRC ... ;-)
> 
> Actually, you could check this with the pfns being the same when >> MAX_ORDER-1.
> We should be aligned on a MAX_ORDER boundary, I think.
> 
> However, pfn_to_page(page_to_pfn(page) + 1) might be safer. If rather slower.


Is this patch acceptable to everyone?  Andrew?

It uses the publicly-exported pfn_to_page/page_to_pfn abstraction, which 
seems to be the only way to accomplish what we want to do in IDE/libata.

	Jeff