linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 2/8] um: Do not use SUBARCH

To: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] um: Do not use SUBARCH
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 13:01:27 +0200
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>, geert@linux-m68k.org, ralf@linux-mips.org, lethal@linux-sh.org, Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>, Guan Xuetao <gxt@mprc.pku.edu.cn>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, x86@kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
In-reply-to: <CALkWK0k5neR50h+AWEF5AgnpbgWMitZUnbv_caVzt6HiUA6mXg@mail.gmail.com>
List-archive: <http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/>
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?Subject=help>
List-id: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
List-owner: <mailto:ralf@linux-mips.org>
List-post: <mailto:linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=subscribe%20linux-mips>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=unsubscribe%20linux-mips>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <1377073172-3662-1-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> <1377073172-3662-3-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> <CALkWK0kCrQ9hPABD_XQ9QFG-vByP+xZWZs+RkVK77+cX7Odz7g@mail.gmail.com> <52441025.9030308@nod.at> <CALkWK0k5neR50h+AWEF5AgnpbgWMitZUnbv_caVzt6HiUA6mXg@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
Am 26.09.2013 12:53, schrieb Ramkumar Ramachandra:
> Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> So, what exactly is broken in upstream?
>> make defconfig works as it always did.
> 
> Auto-detection of SUBARCH, which can be done with a simple call to
> uname -m (the 90% case). The second patch I submitted prevented
> spawning xterms unnecessarily, which we discussed was a good move.

Covering only 90% of all cases is not enough.
We must not break existing setups.
That's also why my "Get rid of SUBARCH" series is not upstream.

Your second patch changed CONFIG_CON_CHAN to pts, which is ok but not
a major issue.
The xterms are also not spawning unnecessarily they spawn upon a tty device is 
opened.
With your patch UML create another pts. Thus, the spawning is hidden...
I did not push it upstream because it depended on your first one and as I said, 
it's not critical.
This does not mean that I moved it to /dev/null.
Again, the plan is to get rid of SUBARCH at all.

>> make defconfig ARCH=um SUBARCH=x86 (or SUBARCH=i386) will create a defconfig 
>> for 32bit.
>> make defconfig ARCH=um SUBARCH=x86_64 one for 64bit.
> 
> Yes, that's how I prepared the patch in the first place.

So, nothing is broken.

If you want "make defconfig ARCH=um" creating a defconfig for the correct arch 
you need
more than your first patch. Again, "Get rid of SUBARCH" series has the same 
goal.

Thanks,
//richard

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>