lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Why shm fs (Was [2.3.51pre2] wrong shm_statfs in ipc/shm.c)
From
Date
Jamie Lokier <lk@tantalophile.demon.co.uk> writes:

> Christoph Rohland wrote:
> I'm not sure it is worth doing either. If it is done, it should
> probably a different fs that uses the same shared memory primitives as
> shmfs -- so you don't have to include the directory etc. code when
> you're only interested in shm.

If we would like to have a tmpfs I would propose something different:
We should create a generic directory handling for virtual file systems
like tmpfs, devfs etc. Thus the biggest part is done there. If we then
also have shm handling in the swap cache instead with special page
tables the tmpfs should be really trivial.

Greetings
Christoph

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:57    [W:0.042 / U:1.480 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site