Hi Hua Zhong,
Maybe I misunderstand your patch, but when I tried it on my blackfin
uClinux platform, I can't change anything. See below:
root:/var> mount
/dev/mtdblock0 on / type ext2 (rw)
/proc on /proc type proc (rw)
ramfs on /var type ramfs (rw)
sysfs on /sys t
> > Here is a simple patch that does it.
>
> Looks more likely to work than Ken's - which I didn't try,
> but I couldn't see what magic prevented it from just going BUG.
>
> But I have to say, having seen the ensuing requests for this
> to impose the same constraints as other implementations of
On Mon, 8 Jan 2007, Hua Zhong wrote:
> A while ago there was a discussion about supporting direct-io on tmpfs.
Ah, I think I can just about remember that... ;)
>
> Here is a simple patch that does it.
Looks more likely to work than Ken's - which I didn't try,
but I couldn't see what magic preve
Peter Staubach wrote:
> Hua Zhong wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> A while ago there was a discussion about supporting direct-io on tmpfs.
>>
>> Here is a simple patch that does it.
>>
>> 1. A new fs flag FS_RAM_BASED is added and the O_DIRECT flag is ignored
>>if this flag is set (suggestions on a better
Hua Zhong wrote:
Hi,
A while ago there was a discussion about supporting direct-io on tmpfs.
Here is a simple patch that does it.
1. A new fs flag FS_RAM_BASED is added and the O_DIRECT flag is ignored
if this flag is set (suggestions on a better name?)
2. Specify FS_RAM_BASED for tmpfs an
On Jan 8 2007 17:43, Hua Zhong wrote:
>
>1. A new fs flag FS_RAM_BASED is added and the O_DIRECT flag is ignored
> if this flag is set (suggestions on a better name?)
FS_IGNORE_DIRECT. Somehow I think this flag is not only useful for
RAM-based filesystems, but also possibly virtual filesystems
6 matches
Mail list logo
