Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759373AbYA1LlS (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 06:41:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750976AbYA1LlF (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 06:41:05 -0500 Received: from fxip-0047f.externet.hu ([88.209.222.127]:33047 "EHLO pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751552AbYA1LlE (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 06:41:04 -0500 To: hugh@veritas.com CC: miklos@szeredi.hu, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-reply-to: (message from Hugh Dickins on Mon, 28 Jan 2008 06:09:26 +0000 (GMT)) Subject: Re: [patch 24/26] mount options: fix tmpfs References: <20080124193341.166753833@szeredi.hu> <20080124193454.408283578@szeredi.hu> Message-Id: From: Miklos Szeredi Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:40:54 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1682 Lines: 38 > > Thanks Miklos, that's a welcome enhancement, nicely done. I've only > noticed one thing wrong (MPOL_PREFERRED shown as "default"); but thought > shmem_config didn't add much value - I'd rather avoid those syntactic > changes to unchanged code; and several tmpfs defaults being relative > (e.g. to totalram_pages, or to mounter's fsuid), I ended up preferring > to do real tests in shmem_show_options. I completely agree, this is much better than my version. > Thus, for example, if memory is hotplugged in or out later, what started > out as an unspecified size option will then get shown as explicit size. > (I did think for a while that I wanted to show explicit size in all > cases; but it looked pretty silly on udev.) I think that's the correct > behaviour, that otherwise would be misleading; but I may be looking at > this the wrong way round, what's your view? I agree, this is the correct way. I'll add functions for calculating the default max values, so the calculations won't accidentally become different for the initialization and the option showing. > If you agree with the version below, please take it into your collection > and insert your Signed-off-by. I should admit, I've not yet tested how > the NUMA policies look: you'll hear from me again tomorrow morning if > those turn out to wrong. OK, I'll send this to Andrew. Maybe I'll wait until tomorrow to hear if it's working on NUMA. Thanks, Miklos -- 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/