From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751296AbdJBVr0 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 2 Oct 2017 17:47:26 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:47580 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1750927AbdJBVrZ (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 2 Oct 2017 17:47:25 -0400
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 7FCF3C0587C6
Authentication-Results: ext-mx08.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
Authentication-Results: ext-mx08.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=jglisse@redhat.com
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 17:47:23 -0400
From: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hmm: constify hmm_devmem_page_get_drvdata() parameter
Message-ID: <20171002214722.GA5184@redhat.com>
References: <1506972774-10191-1-git-send-email-jglisse@redhat.com>
 <20171002144042.e33ff3cf7dc95845e255d2c0@linux-foundation.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20171002144042.e33ff3cf7dc95845e255d2c0@linux-foundation.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23)
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.32]); Mon, 02 Oct 2017 21:47:25 +0000 (UTC)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 02:40:42PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon,  2 Oct 2017 15:32:54 -0400 Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > From: Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>
> > 
> > Constify pointer parameter to avoid issue when use from code that
> > only has const struct page pointer to use in the first place.
> 
> That's rather vague.  Does such calling code exist in the kernel?  This
> affects the which-kernel-gets-patched decision.

This is use by device driver, no driver upstream yet so it does not
affect anybody upstream yet.

Jérôme