Re: Does /var/shm still need to be mounted?

From: Tigran Aivazian (
Date: Fri Jun 02 2000 - 07:25:50 EST

On Fri, 2 Jun 2000, Gabor Lenart wrote:
> Yes, /proc should be purged from many things which are there at the moment.
> But /var/shm is a very dumb idea for mounting shm, IMHO. It should be
> /dev/shm or something similar, but it's a very strange idea to mount a
> "virtual" filesystem under a standard and well-known directory (/var).
> Think about compatiblity, archivers etc, etc.

did you look at kern_mount/umount interface that went into the kernel
recently? Things like shm and pipefs should (and already are) mounted
under artificially constructed root mountpoints like "pipe:" which are not
visible for namelookups coming from userspace. Ok, it is not the case for
shm currently (it is mounted on /) but perhaps it should be (i.e. the way
root dentry should be allocated as for pipefs using d_alloc() directly
instead of using generic d_alloc_root())?

I cc'd Al Viro as I suspect he knows the answer to the above question.


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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 07 2000 - 21:00:15 EST