lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: question about kernel 2.4 ramdisk
Date
Hi Tachino,

On Wed, 05 Dec 2001, Tachino Nobuhiro wrote:
>> Please! If you do the limit checking for ramfs adapt the same
>> options like shmem.c
>> i.e. size,nr_inodes,nr_blocks,mode(+uid+gid). Don't invent yet
>> another mount option set. Also give them the same semantics. Best
>> would be to use shmem_parse_options.
>
> These options are not my invention. Ramfs in 2.4.13-ac7 already has
> them. But I agree the original options are not easy to understand,
> so if compatibility does not matter, I am glad to change them.

But this was never integrated into the stock kernel.

>> Further thought: Wouldn't it be better to add a no_swap mount
>> option to shmem and try to merge the two? There is a lot of code
>> duplication between mm/shmem.c and fs/ramfs/inode.c.
>
> I thought that too. but I don't know it should be done in stable
> kernel series.

But we have 2.5 now. And that's where this should be done.

Greetings
Christoph


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:18    [W:0.121 / U:2.760 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site