From owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jul  3 17:49:41 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51149DBB;
 Thu,  3 Jul 2014 17:49:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client CN "wonkity.com", Issuer "wonkity.com" (not verified))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F09C622FB;
 Thu,  3 Jul 2014 17:49:40 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by wonkity.com (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id s63Hnddp004088
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO);
 Thu, 3 Jul 2014 11:49:39 -0600 (MDT)
 (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com)
Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost)
 by wonkity.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/Submit) with ESMTP id s63HndsR004085;
 Thu, 3 Jul 2014 11:49:39 -0600 (MDT)
 (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com)
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 11:49:39 -0600 (MDT)
From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com>
To: Ian Lepore <ian@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: /tmp, /var/log, /var/tmp as /dev/md - why?
In-Reply-To: <1404396464.20883.404.camel@revolution.hippie.lan>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.11.1407031134240.3872@wonkity.com>
References: <201407010925.s619PHeT006679@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk>
 <44a6e8a451a.810fa8f@mail.schwarzes.net> <53B3EB29.4030908@gmail.com>
 <alpine.BSF.2.11.1407030436060.99346@wonkity.com>
 <20140703105519.GA37593@zibbi.meraka.csir.co.za>
 <1404396464.20883.404.camel@revolution.hippie.lan>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (BSF 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3
 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Thu, 03 Jul 2014 11:49:39 -0600 (MDT)
Cc: freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." <freebsd-arm.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-arm>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arm-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arm/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arm@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arm-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arm-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 17:49:41 -0000

On Thu, 3 Jul 2014, Ian Lepore wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 12:55 +0200, John Hay wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 04:47:24AM -0600, Warren Block wrote:
>>>
>>> So a limited-size tmpfs will be faster and use less memory overall.  A
>>> benchmark comparison would be interesting.
>>
>> Last time I looked the rc scripts that create /etc, /var and /tmp
>> ramdisks only did it using md devices. It would be great if it was
>> easily tunable from say rc.conf or if could detect which one is
>> available and use that.
>
> I have patches ready to commit that do exactly that, but they weren't
> exactly enthusiastically received when I posted them on arch@ for
> review.

This thread?
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/2014-March/015141.html

Have not read it fully yet, but it sounds exactly right: everything acts 
the same, the user can just pick tmpfs or mfs.