On 04/27/2012 01:08 AM, Greg Ungerer wrote: > On 26/04/12 15:14, Rob Landley wrote: >>> I have also been able to boot an ARM noMMU kernel for the AT91x40 SoC >>> under SkyEye. This time, the userspace works fine. I haven't had the >>> time to clean up this, and it requires patches to both the kernel and >>> SkyEye to work properly. If you're interested, I'll give you these >>> patches and configs when I'm done with the cleanup. >> >> I'm unlikely to play with skyeye (tried it once, but it was years ago). >> >> Is there a strong reason nommu kernel's won't run on hardware or an >> emulator that _does_ implement an mmu? (Can't it just not use it?) > > No. It comes down to architectural support. There are a few that do > it. I have ColdFire hardware with MMU, it can be compiled and run > either with or without MMU enabled (by flicking the kernel's > CONFIG_MMU switch).
Architectural support in the kernel, or in the emulator? Not having nommu support for i386 is one thing, but why can I boot a nommu arm under qemu? (What's involved in nommu archiectural support? Running a dedicated single-process i386 system in 4 megs ram might get a bit easier if you don't need to spend memory on page tables, seems nice to have the _option_...) Rob -- GNU/Linux isn't: Linux=GPLv2, GNU=GPLv3+, they can't share code. Either it's "mere aggregation", or a license violation. Pick one. _______________________________________________ Celinux-dev mailing list Celinux-dev@lists.celinuxforum.org https://lists.celinuxforum.org/mailman/listinfo/celinux-dev
