On 10/04/2011 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
A little late - but thanks again for the constructive feedback. Very
good point, I was indeed looking at the 0.9.32 tree and not what is
on git.
ryan
_______________________________________________
uClibc mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
