On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Daniel Egger wrote:
> Am Die, 2003-04-01 um 18.24 schrieb Christoph Rohland:
>
> > But on these systems you better use ramfs.
>
> Just curious: Why? I'm using tmpfs on these systems and I'm rather
> satisfied with it; especially the option to limit the amount of space
> makes it rather useful. According to the documentation ramfs is most
> useful as an educational example how to write filesystems not as a
> real filesystem...
Simply because quite a lot of the tmpfs code is concerned with moving
pages between ram and swap: if you've limited ram and no swap, you may
not want to waste your ram on that code! One day I might try applying
#ifdef CONFIG_SWAPs within mm/shmem.c; but I might well not, it could
get ugly, and looks rudimentary elsewhere - do we intend to get serious
about CONFIG_SWAP?
Hugh
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 07 2003 - 22:00:14 EST