On Monday, October 03, 2011 04:16:36 Ryan Flux wrote: > On 10/02/2011 05:01 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Thursday, September 29, 2011 18:40:23 Steve Bennett wrote: > >> --- a/extra/Configs/Config.microblaze > >> +++ b/extra/Configs/Config.microblaze > >> > >> +choice > >> + prompt "Microblaze MMU Capability" > >> + default CONFIG_MICROBLAZE_NO_MMU > >> + depends on TARGET_microblaze > >> + help > >> + Determines the MMU capability of your microblaze CPU. > >> + > >> +config CONFIG_MICROBLAZE_NO_MMU > >> + bool "no mmu" > >> + select HAVE_NO_PIC > >> + select ARCH_HAS_NO_SHARED > >> > >> select ARCH_HAS_NO_MMU > >> > >> + > >> +config CONFIG_MICROBLAZE_MMU > >> + bool "mmu" > >> + select ARCH_HAS_MMU > >> + > >> +endchoice > > > > why do you need your own ? we already have common ARCH_USE_MMU. > > The reason behind not using ARCH_USE_MMU is that the > Microblaze core may not necessarily have a MMU. (The > MMU is an optional feature of the core).
i'm not sure how this is relevant. ARCH_{HAVE,USE}_MMU are presented to the
user already so the user gets to decide whether to utilize the MMU (or if the
hardware has it in the first place).
> The configuration is based on how the ARM architecture
> uses the target processor choice in extra/Configs/Config.arm
> for the various MMU/no-MMU processors.
is your tree up to date ? extra/Configs/Config.arm in latest master doesn't
have any MMU defines.
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
