On 01/28/2014 12:37 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 01/28/2014 11:56 AM, John Stultz wrote: >> Thanks for reminding me about O_TMPFILE.. I have it on my list to look >> into how it could be used. >> >> As for the O_TMPFILE only tmpfs option, it seems maybe a little clunky >> to me, but possible. If others think this would be preferred over a new >> syscall, I'll dig in deeper. >> > What is clunky about it? It reuses an existing interface and still > points to the specific tmpfs instance that should be populated. It would require new mount point convention that userland would have to standardize. To me (and admittedly its a taste thing), a new O_TMPFILE-only tmpfs mount point seems to be to be a bigger interface change from an application writers perspective then a new syscall. But maybe I'm misunderstanding your suggestion? thanks -john -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>