Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:28:54 +0200 | From | Michal Simek <> | Subject | Re: Microblaze Linux release |
| |
>>> I think so. Sharing code among archs looks nice and this way is definitely >>> right. But starting with communication with PowerPC guys that this code I want >>> to use in case that this code is not in vanilla. This is not good start for >>> doing this. >> I have a commit queued up that moves lmb.c into the top-level lib >> directory so other architectures can use it easily. Dave Miller >> wanted this so he could use it for sparc64. That will go into Linus' >> tree when the merge window opens and will be in 2.6.26. So I don't >> see any reason why microblaze couldn't use the LMB stuff. >> > > Right, fair enough. I was mostly objecting to the idea of creating another > copy of the lmb code when bootmem should be sufficient for what microblaze > needs. Using the code from lib/lmb.c sounds fair enough when it's already > there. > > One more reason for the microblaze kernel to base on top of linux-next > instead of mainline.
For me is not difficult to use lmb from microblaze/mm or from lib if the files are the same.
Michal Simek
| |