On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 05:51:43PM -0400, Jeff Dike wrote: > On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 09:47:27PM +0200, Mattia Dongili wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 08:14:32PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > > > To make some writable tmpfs available to those in need of such system, > > > and to avoid using /dev/shm/ which is reserved for the shm-functions, > > > I just uploaded sysvinit version 2.86.ds1-26. It will mount a tmpfs > > > on /lib/init/rw/ that can be used instead. If /lib/init/rw/.ramfs > > > exist, that mount point is a tmpfs. I'm not sure if this last change > > > will make it into Etch or not, but I hope so, to solve any problems > > > with packages previously using /dev/shm/ as a generic tmpfs file > > > system. > > > > Well, I'd actually prefer if you could remove the noexec flag from > > /dev/shm. I understand the security reasons given in the bugreport but > > I'd prefer avoid having to deal with one more Debian-only (is it?) > > thing given the soon to come general freeze. > > UML needs a non-noexec place to keep a file that will be used as its > physical memory. A tmpfs mount is greatly preferred for performance > reasons as well as tmpfs being the only filesystem supporting > MADV_REMOVE, which is used for memory hotplug.
Thinking of a Debian only fix for the above, does simply playing with default_tmpdir in arch/um/os-Linux/mem.c (probably in which_tmpdir()) suffice to use /lib/init/rw/.ramfs as default? (Yes I should try it... will try to find some time next week) Thanks -- mattia :wq! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
