Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Patch (repost): cramfs memory corruption fix | Date | Mon, 8 Jan 2001 14:42:18 +0000 (GMT) | From | Alan Cox <> |
| |
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I wonder what to do about this - the limits are obviously useful, as > > would the "use swap-space as a backing store" thing be. At the same > > time I'd really hate to lose the lean-mean-clean ramfs. > > Let me repeat on this issue: shmem.c has everything needed for this > despite read and write and they should be really easy to add. > > I did not plan to write them in the near future because I did not > think that this is a really wanted feature. But I can look into it.
I have been thinking about this. I think we should merge the size limiting code with the example clean ramfs code. Having spent a while debugging the LFS checks and some other funnies I realised one problem with the ramfs in 2.4.0 as an example. It does not demonstrate error cases, which the new one does.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |