In article <6b2d1e190611090747t4db83fbesb97a64d3db3c72c8@mail.gmail.com>,
Julio M. Merino Vidal <jmmv84@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>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
>  removed.
>* 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?

Ask core...

christos