From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [34/37] Large blocksize support in ramfs Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 14:29:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <20070620182907.506775016@sgi.com> <20070620183013.967063205@sgi.com> <20070620205002.GH5181@schatzie.adilger.int> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Mel Gorman , William Lee Irwin III , David Chinner , Jens Axboe , Badari Pulavarty , Maxim Levitsky To: Andreas Dilger Return-path: Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28]:40395 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752219AbXFTV3W (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jun 2007 17:29:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070620205002.GH5181@schatzie.adilger.int> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 20 Jun 2007, Andreas Dilger wrote: > On Jun 20, 2007 11:29 -0700, clameter@sgi.com wrote: > > If you apply this patch and then you can f.e. try this: > > > > mount -tramfs -o10 none /media > > > @@ -164,10 +165,15 @@ static int ramfs_fill_super(struct super > > + if (options && *options) > > + order = simple_strtoul(options, NULL, 10); > > This is probably a bad name for a mount option. What about "order=10"? > Otherwise you prevent any other option from being used in the future. I tried to make it as simple as possible. The patch is primarily useful as a debugging aid since it eliminates the lower layers from the game. I think ramfs should be left as is sine it is intended as a minimal implementation that should stay simpl. If we really want such an option for good then it may best be added to shmem or ramdisk drivers?