Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 29 Apr 2004 16:49:45 -0400 (EDT) | From | Nicolas Pitre <> | Subject | Re: CONFIG_XIP_ROM vs. CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL |
| |
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Tim Bird wrote:
> I'm looking at some sources for kernel Execute-in-place (XIP). > > I see references to CONFIG_XIP_ROM and CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL, > in different architecture branches of the same kernel > source tree. > > Is this difference merely the result of inconsistent > usage, or is there a functional difference between > these two options?
It's the result of me deciding CONFIG_XIP_ROM wasn't totally appropriate ...
> I can imagine that CONFIG_XIP_ROM is intended only to > handle XIP in ROM, and that CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL possibly > handles additional cases like XIP in flash. However, > before jumping to that conclusion I thought I would > ask if there is some intention behind the different > config names.
... so I renamed it to CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL. Especially since there is also XIPable user space which also can be stored in ROM (or flash). So please disregard CONFIG_XIP_ROM and use CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL. Whether ROM or Flash is used is rather irrelevant to the code this option is linked to.
Nicolas
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |