On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 04:35:28PM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 03:26:59PM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > >> My exit strategy was to make hugetlbfs an alias for ramfs when ramfs > >> acquired the necessary functionality until expand-on-mmap() was merged. > >> That would've allowed rm -rf fs/hugetlbfs/ outright. A compatibility > >> wrapper for expand-on-mmap() around ramfs once ramfs acquires the > >> necessary functionality is now the exit strategy. > > On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 05:53:48PM -0500, Matt Mackall wrote: > > Can you describe what ramfs needs here in a bit more detail? > > If it's non-trivial, I'd rather see any new functionality go into > > shmfs/tmpfs, as ramfs has done a good job at staying a minimal fs thus > > far. > > I was referring to fully-general multiple pagesize support. ramfs > would inherit the functionality by virtue of generic pagecache and TLB > handling in such an arrangement. It doesn't make sense to modify ramfs > as a special case; hugetlb is as it stands a ramfs special-cased for > such purposes.
Ahh, I see. Good luck! -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. - 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/