On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 02:52:37PM +0900, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
> > > because tmpfs doesn't know the fact that some memory like buffer cache
> > > can be reclaimed on-demand, it behaves too conservatively if memory is
> > > filled up with caches.
> > 
> > Can I work around this with the right choice of vm settings?  Setting very
> > high vm.anon{min,max} and vm.file{min,max} = {0,1} didn't help.
> > 
> > Is uvm_wait() the right thing to do in tmpfs_reg_resize() when there
> > are insufficient free pages?
> 
> no and no.
> 
> IMO removing tmpfs auto-sizing feature is a way to go.
> ie. mandate -s option of mount_tmpfs and trust it.

Can you provide some implementation advice for "trusting" a mandatory
-s option?  I need to fix the ENOSPC bug or switch back to mfs (ugh!),
because the bug makes tmpfs capacity unpredictable.

Dave

-- 
David Young             OJC Technologies
dyoung@ojctech.com      Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933