Re: question about kernel 2.4 ramdisk

Christoph Rohland (cr@sap.com)
05 Dec 2001 09:23:03 +0100


Hi Tachino,

On Wed, 05 Dec 2001, Tachino Nobuhiro wrote:
> + if (!strcmp(optname, "maxfilesize") && value) {
> + p->filepages = simple_strtoul(value, &value, 0)
> + / K_PER_PAGE;
> + if (*value)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + } else if (!strcmp(optname, "maxsize") && value) {
> + p->pages = simple_strtoul(value, &value, 0)
> + / K_PER_PAGE;
> + if (*value)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + } else if (!strcmp(optname, "maxinodes") && value) {
> + p->inodes = simple_strtoul(value, &value, 0);
> + if (*value)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + } else if (!strcmp(optname, "maxdentries") && value) {
> + p->dentries = simple_strtoul(value, &value, 0);
> + if (*value)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }

Please! If you do the limit checking for ramfs adapt the same options
like shmem.c i.e. size,nr_inodes,nr_blocks,mode(+uid+gid). Don't
invent yet another mount option set. Also give them the same
semantics. Best would be to use shmem_parse_options.

Further thought: Wouldn't it be better to add a no_swap mount option
to shmem and try to merge the two? There is a lot of code duplication
between mm/shmem.c and fs/ramfs/inode.c.

Greetings
Christoph

-
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/