Re: [patch 08/10] shmem: inode defragmentation support

[Christoph Lameter]

On Fri, 18 May 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:

> Do we need *this*? (compare procfs)
> 
> I believe that shmfs's inodes remain "more" in memory than those of
> procfs. That is, procfs ones can find their way out (we can regenerate
> it), while shmfs/tmpfs/ramfs/etc. should not do that (we'd lose the
> file).

Ahh... Okay so shmem inodes are not defraggable.

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