[lkml]   [2000]   [Dec]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: innd mmap bug in 2.4.0-test12
Chris Wedgwood <> writes:

> I would prefer we leave ramfs alone as is -- it makes an excellent
> starting point for a new fs and is fairly simple to grok. If we are
> to add any more complexity here like the size limiting patches or the
> use of a backing store, I'd like to have this as a new filesystem,
> something like 'vmfs' or some such.

That's shm fs + read and write which should be easy to add.

> ramfs is small simple and elegant; for mere mortals like me it
> contains enough to help understand what is required of a filesystem
> without obscuring this fact. I'd hate to see that change.

yes. That's why I copied a lot of the ramfs code into mm/shmem.c


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:52    [W:0.094 / U:2.656 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site