On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 12:26:05AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 December 2008, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > I have used the following include guard:
> > >
> > > #ifdef __uClinux__
> > > #include "atomic_no.h"
> > > #else
> > > #include "atomic_mm.h"
> > > #endif
> > >
> > > gcc -E -dM for the two compilers revealed that this was the
> > > only symbol that differed.
> >
> > I think you can share a toolchain for m68k and m68knommu, at least for the
> > kernel (I used my plain m68k toolchain when experimenting with m68knommu for
> > Amiga).
> >
> > > With the above construct we do the "right thing" also for
> > > headers exported to userspace.
> > > But actually none of the headers using the above are
> > > subject for export at the moment so we could use a
> > > CONFIG_ symbol for the same.
> >
> > So I prefer to just check CONFIG_MMU.
>
> Some of them are, by means of include/asm-generic/Kbuild.asm, e.g.
> unistd.h!
>
> I'm not sure if it's entirely correct, but I think you can use
>
> #ifdef __KERNEL__
> # ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> # include "atomic_mm.h
> # else
> # include "atomic_no.h
> # endif
> #else
> # ifndef __uClinux__
> # include "atomic_mm.h
> # else
> # include "atomic_no.h
> # endif
> #endif
I kept the original way of doing it since all reports said that
__uClinux__ is set by the m68knommu toolchain.
Using only this symbol makes it simpler what happens.
Sam
_______________________________________________
uClinux-dev mailing list
uClinux-dev@uclinux.org
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev
This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org
To unsubscribe see:
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/options/uclinux-dev
