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

Reply via email to