Messages in this thread | | | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Date | Sat, 14 Jul 2018 11:43:57 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 0/6] fs/dcache: Track & limit # of negative dentries |
| |
On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 11:36 AM Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote: > > OK, this > /* > * No ordinary (disk based) filesystem counts links as inodes; > * but each new link needs a new dentry, pinning lowmem, and > * tmpfs dentries cannot be pruned until they are unlinked. > */ > ret = shmem_reserve_inode(inode->i_sb); > if (ret) > goto out; > will probably help (on ramfs it won't, though).
Nobody who cares about memory use would use ramfs and then allow random users on it.
I think you can exhaust memory more easily on ramfs by just writing a huge file. Do we have any limits at all?
ramfs is fine for things like initramfs, but I think the comment says it all:
* NOTE! This filesystem is probably most useful * not as a real filesystem, but as an example of * how virtual filesystems can be written.
and even that comment may have been more correct back in 2000 than it is today.
Linus
| |