[lkml]   [2001]   [Jan]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: shmem or swapfs? was: [Patch] make shm filesystem part configurable
Hi Albert,

"Albert D. Cahalan" <> writes:

> Admins already know what "tmpfs" means, so you should just call
> your filesystem that. I know it isn't a pretty name, but in the
> interest of reducing confusion, you should use the existing name.
> Don't think of it as just "for /tmp". It is for temporary storage.
> The name is a reminder that you shouldn't store archives in tmpfs.

OK right now I see two alternatives for the name: "tmpfs" for the SUN
admins and "vmfs" for expressing what it does and to be in line with
"ramfs". Any votes?

> Again for compatibility, Sun's size option would be useful.
> -o size=111222333 Size in bytes, rounded up by page size.
> -o size=111222k Size in kilobytes (base-2 or ISO standard?)
> -o size=111m Size in megabytes (base-2 or ISO standard?)
> I'd prefer k for ISO standard and K for base-2.
> Of course m isn't millibytes, but that isn't horrible.

No, I would go for base-2 only. That's what we typically mean with K
and M in the IT world. To be case sensitive is IMHO overkill and


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 13:28    [W:0.051 / U:0.752 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site