What happened to this one? Is it in -mm?
Thanks! -- Al Al Boldi wrote: > Bodo Eggert wrote: > > Al Boldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Bodo Eggert wrote: > > >> This is a rework of Al Boldi's "[PATCH] initramfs: Allow rootfs to > > >> use tmpfs instead of ramfs". All the fame belongs to him, the bugs > > >> belong to me. > > > > > > Actually, my patch was a rework of John Zielinski's > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=107013630212011&w=4 patch, so the > > > credit really goes to him. > > > > > >> Signed-Off-By: Bodo Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> > > >> > > >> diff -Xdontdiff -pruN linux-2.6.22.base/fs/Kconfig > > >> linux-2.6.22.tmpfsroot/fs/Kconfig --- linux-2.6.22.base/fs/Kconfig > > >> 2007-07-12 14:05:16.000000000 +0200 +++ > > >> linux-2.6.22.tmpfsroot/fs/Kconfig 2007-07-12 15:10:09.000000000 +0200 > > >> @@ -989,6 +989,22 @@ config TMPFS_POSIX_ACL > > > > > > Setting this in fs/Kconfig is way to deep, and too far away from the > > > initramfs Kconfig, which makes it obscure. > > > > If it were under general setup, you'd have to enter fs to select tmpfs, > > enter general setup to replace ramfs, and re-enter fs to disable ramfs. > > I consider making people do that to be an evil deed. > > That's easy to fix, just change "depends on" to "select" in Kconfig. > > > The current position is very convenient, ramfs is below tmpfs, and while > > you go from top to the bottom, you can enable tmpfs, > > tmpfs-replaces-ramfs and ramfs=n. > > > > >> If you don't know what Access Control Lists are, say N. > > >> > > >> +config TMPFS_ROOT > > >> + bool "Use tmpfs instrad of ramfs for initramfs" > > > > > > Check typo. > > > > > >> + depends on TMPFS > > > > > > Should probably depend on SHMEM too. > > > > Sounds reasonable. > > > > >> @@ -1003,7 +1019,7 @@ config HUGETLB_PAGE > > >> def_bool HUGETLBFS > > >> > > >> config RAMFS > > >> - bool > > >> + bool "Ramfs file system support" if TMPFS_ROOT > > > > > > What's wrong with the original Kconfig of making this tristate? > > > > I tested =m, found it not to compile because of a nonexported __symbol > > and decided it wasn't worth the effort of adding another export while > > other people struggle to reduce their number. > > Ok. > > > >> diff -Xdontdiff -pruN linux-2.6.22.base/mm/shmem.c > > >> linux-2.6.22.tmpfsroot/mm/shmem.c --- linux-2.6.22.base/mm/shmem.c > > >> 2007-07-12 14:05:25.000000000 +0200 +++ > > >> linux-2.6.22.tmpfsroot/mm/shmem.c 2007-07-12 15:01:32.000000000 +0200 > > >> @@ -2369,6 +2369,8 @@ static void init_once(void *foo, struct > > >> > > >> static int init_inodecache(void) > > >> { > > >> + if (shmem_inode_cachep) > > >> + return 0; > > >> shmem_inode_cachep = kmem_cache_create("shmem_inode_cache", > > >> sizeof(struct shmem_inode_info), > > >> 0, 0, init_once, NULL); > > >> @@ -2582,6 +2584,34 @@ put_memory: > > >> return ERR_PTR(error); > > >> } > > >> > > >> +#ifdef CONFIG_TMPFS_ROOT > > >> +static int rootfs_get_sb(struct file_system_type *fs_type, > > >> + int flags, const char *dev_name, void *data, struct vfsmount > > >> *mnt) +{ > > >> + return get_sb_nodev(fs_type, flags|MS_NOUSER, data, > > >> shmem_fill_super, + mnt); > > > > > > Setting the MS_NOUSER flag will make this invisible to df (diskfree). > > > > Which is obviously a bad thing for my cause, but good if you'd boot a > > normal system. Is there any way out? > > Just remove the MS_NOUSER flag. Normal systems would want to umount it > after pivoting, so it won't be visible then. > > > >> +} > > >> + > > >> +/*static struct super_block *rootfs_get_sb(struct file_system_type > > >> *fs_type, + int flags, const char *dev_name, void *data) > > >> +{ > > >> + return get_sb_single(fs_type, flags, data, shmem_fill_super); > > >> +}*/ > > > > > > You commented this out, probably asking for clarification: IIRC, it's > > > get_sb_single instead of get_sb_nodev, because tmpfs can be mounted > > > more than once and thus needs to be reference counted. > > > > No, I had left it there accidentially. Your comment tells me it was ment > > to happen. > > Thanks! > > -- > Al - 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/
