Subject: Re: Removing tmpfs' experimental status, take 2
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Christos Zoulas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/09/2006 21:26:00
In article <email@example.com>,
Julio M. Merino Vidal <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>It has been almost three weeks since I proposed removing tmpfs's
>experimental status. At that time several concerns were raised and
>all of them have been addressed. These were:
>* NFS-exportability. tmpfs now works over NFS; at the very least
> its test suite can be executed successfully over a remote tmpfs.
>* Data corruption: Two issues were raised. Once was a real
> problem in tmpfs where it would not deal with mtimes properly
> during renames and the other was due to misconfiguration on
> the tester's machine. In other words, there was no "data
> corruption" as such.
>* vnd over files in tmpfs: This now works.
>* Linux binaries cannot readdir tmpfs properly: This has been
> addressed and now applications such as OpenOffice.org (the
> one against which the bug was filled) can see the contents of
> tmpfs volumes.
>* kqueue notifications have been audited and they now match the
> behavior of MFS (FFS).
>Aside the raised issues:
>* A tmpfs LKM has been added.
>* A bug in tmpfs has been fixed that caused a crash (in DEBUG
> kernels only) when accessing the current directory after it was
>* Maybe something else...
>There still remains the problem of "too much memory usage" but fixing
>that has a lot of chances of breaking stability. Plus there is no
>time to do that safely before 4.0 ships (e.g. I don't know where to
>start yet, and it seems certainly non-trivial).
>So... what do you think about removing the experimental status now and
>enabling tmpfs by default in all GENERIC kernels?