Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 6 Mar 2023 15:04:57 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 5/6] shmem: update documentation | From | David Hildenbrand <> |
| |
On 03.03.23 00:27, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > Update the docs to reflect a bit better why some folks prefer tmpfs > over ramfs and clarify a bit more about the difference between brd > ramdisks. > > Signed-off-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org> > --- > Documentation/filesystems/tmpfs.rst | 27 +++++++++++++++++++-------- > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/tmpfs.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/tmpfs.rst > index 0408c245785e..e77ebdacadd0 100644 > --- a/Documentation/filesystems/tmpfs.rst > +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/tmpfs.rst > @@ -13,14 +13,25 @@ everything stored therein is lost. > > tmpfs puts everything into the kernel internal caches and grows and > shrinks to accommodate the files it contains and is able to swap > -unneeded pages out to swap space. It has maximum size limits which can > -be adjusted on the fly via 'mount -o remount ...' > - > -If you compare it to ramfs (which was the template to create tmpfs) > -you gain swapping and limit checking. Another similar thing is the RAM > -disk (/dev/ram*), which simulates a fixed size hard disk in physical > -RAM, where you have to create an ordinary filesystem on top. Ramdisks > -cannot swap and you do not have the possibility to resize them. > +unneeded pages out to swap space.
I suppose, in contrast to ramfs, tmpfs also supports THP. Maybe worth adding as well.
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
-- Thanks,
David / dhildenb
| |