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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
