On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>
> Something I dislike about it, though, is that it leaves the RAM-backed
> filesystems (ramfs, tmpfs, whatever) behaving visibly differently from
> the others.
I hear you.
But I'm not seeing many alternatives, unless we start taking write faults
on them unnecessarily. Do we care? Probably not really.
So we certainly *could* make ramfs/tmpfs claim they do dirty accounting,
but just having a no-op writeback. Without that, they'd need something
really special in the file time updates.
Personally, I don't really see anybody really caring one way or the other,
but who knows..
Linus
--
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/
