On 04/10/2011, at 12:33 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> 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
As mentioned, this was forward ported from 0.9.32.
With the config updates in latest master, looks like we can omit this entirely.
I'll respin a new patch series.
Cheers,
Steve
--
µWeb: Embedded Web Framework - http://uweb.workware.net.au/
WorkWare Systems Pty Ltd
W: www.workware.net.au P: +61 434 921 300
E: [email protected] F: +61 7 3391 6002
_______________________________________________
uClibc mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
