Greg Ungerer wrote: > Hi Jamie, > > On 12/17/2009 11:45 PM, Jamie Lokier wrote: > >Greg Ungerer wrote: > >>Did you want me to pick this up and apply the the m68knommu.git > >>tree for inclusion in 2.6.34? > > > >Would it not be worth holding off mainlining it until there's a > >userspace m68knommu NPTL, just in case it turns out something > >important was overlooked? > > My thinking is that if it is present (and has a good chance > of working given its derivation from m68k)
There are some kernel API differences needed between arm-nommu and arm-mmu, due to the inability to map helper functions (atomic cmpxchg, barrier, get_tls) at fixed virtual addresses, so I wouldn't be surprised if the same applies to m68k. > I would of course test it on a bunch of targets, but if it doesn't > break anything as it stands today is it really a problem? Only if someone may run a program which works on a later kernel on an older kernel, and would like it to fail or switch to LinuxThreads, rather than behave wrongly on the intermediate kernels, if there's an API problem. > then it may encourage someone to do the NPTL work needed in uClibc > sooner than later. That's a good reason. I was thinking perhaps anyone doing m68k-nommu NPTL work would apply the available NPTL-kernel patch to their kernel, but perhaps I am naive about such things :-) -- Jamie _______________________________________________ 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
