[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200705081436.11928.a1426z@gawab.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 14:36:11 +0300
From: Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Dmitry Krivoschekov <dmitry.krivoschekov@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Execute in place
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Al Boldi wrote:
> >> What you're talking about is, *and should be*, a different filesystem.
> >> You will relatively quickly find that you have to deal with the same
> >> kind of stuff that you have to in any filesystem.
> >
> > That's exactly what I want to avoid, as this would introduce a
> > performance penalty.
> >
> > All we need is a periodically synced tmpfs to mmap, with a minimal
> > stream into page-cache algo on mount.
>
> ... which would be completely useless, because you wouldn't get any sort
> of coherency; you would have pointers pointing into space, etc. etc.
You don't really think that anybody is suggesting to store the tmpfs data
without any coherency, do you?
I am suggesting that you can easily isolate tmpfs coherency from the rest of
the page-cache, by simply streaming tmpfs data out to an mmap and plugging
it with the tmpfs fat on umount. And streaming things back in on mount.
> Sorry, it's useless.
Persisting tmpfs is useful for the mere case of saving you the need to
repopulate on mount.
Thanks!
--
Al
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists