linux-kernel - Re: [34/37] Large blocksize support in ramfs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070620205002.GH5181@schatzie.adilger.int>
Date:	Wed, 20 Jun 2007 14:50:02 -0600
From:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>
To:	clameter@....com
Cc:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Mel Gorman <mel@...net.ie>,
	William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>,
	David Chinner <dgc@....com>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...il.com>,
	Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [34/37] Large blocksize support in ramfs

On Jun 20, 2007  11:29 -0700, clameter@....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.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Principal Software Engineer
Cluster File Systems, Inc.

-
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/