linux-kernel - Re: tmpfs disabled in .config but in /proc/filesystems

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: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0710052134180.10392@poirot.grange>
Date:	Fri, 5 Oct 2007 21:36:51 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Guennadi Liakhovetski <lg@...x.de>
To:	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: tmpfs disabled in .config but in /proc/filesystems

On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Hugh Dickins wrote:

> On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > Am I running crazy here (some 2.6.23-rc6-ish)?
> > 
> > $ zcat /proc/config.gz | grep TMPFS
> > # CONFIG_TMPFS is not set
> > $ grep tmpfs /proc/filesystems
> > nodev   tmpfs
> 
> tmpfs (mm/shmem.c) is used by the kernel to support shared memory
> of various kinds even when CONFIG_TMPFS is not set.  But only when
> CONFIG_TMPFS=y can users mount a tmpfs as a fully capable filesystem.
> Confusing, yes: sorry for putting the fear of craziness upon you.

Oops, sorry, now I remember reading about this... As a matter of fact, the 
presence in /proc/filesystem - was it a deliberate decision, or 
technically preferrable or a mistake? Wouldn't it be more logical to 
completely hide it from the user then?

Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski
-
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/