Re: Patch (repost): cramfs memory corruption fix

[Alan Cox]

> On Sun, 7 Jan 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > I wonder what to do about this - the limits are obviously useful, as
> > would the "use swap-space as a backing store" thing be. At the same
> > time I'd really hate to lose the lean-mean-clean ramfs.
> 
> Let me repeat on this issue: shmem.c has everything needed for this
> despite read and write and they should be really easy to add. 
> 
> I did not plan to write them in the near future because I did not
> think that this is a really wanted feature. But I can look into it.

I have been thinking about this. I think we should merge the size limiting code
with the example clean ramfs code. Having spent a while debugging the LFS
checks and some other funnies I realised one problem with the ramfs in
2.4.0 as an example. It does not demonstrate error cases, which the new one
does.