Re: [patch] mm: tiny-shmem fix lor, mmap_sem vs i_mutex

[Hugh Dickins]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, David Howells wrote:
> Hugh Dickins <hugh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > If we're hell-bent on #ifdefs throughout mm/shmem.c, I wouldn't
> > mind scattering some CONFIG_SWAPs in there too, would cut out
> > lots of overhead when swap unconfigured.  But again, how ugly?
> 
> That might be necessary: NOMMU doesn't support swap.

Matt would be dealing with that aspect in his unification: SHMEM
depends on MMU, so !MMU gives you TINY_SHMEM - I'm sure he wouldn't
have any of the SWAP stuff in the TINY_SHMEM part of his unification.
But there's still value in adding CONFIG_SWAPs too (if the #ifdefs
were tolerable, by no means clear).

Hugh
--
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/