On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Hugh Dickins wrote:
quoted text
> 
> Something I dislike about it, though, is that it leaves the RAM-backed
> filesystems (ramfs, tmpfs, whatever) behaving visibly differently from
> the others.

I hear you. 

But I'm not seeing many alternatives, unless we start taking write faults 
on them unnecessarily. Do we care? Probably not really. 

So we certainly *could* make ramfs/tmpfs claim they do dirty accounting, 
but just having a no-op writeback. Without that, they'd need something 
really special in the file time updates.

Personally, I don't really see anybody really caring one way or the other, 
but who knows..

		Linus
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/