[Top] [All Lists]

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

To: Ramkumar Ramachandra <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] um: Do not use SUBARCH
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 15:26:06 +0200
Cc: Richard Weinberger <>, Linux-Arch <>, Michal Marek <>, Ralf Baechle <>, Paul Mundt <>, Jeff Dike <>, Guan Xuetao <>, Thomas Gleixner <>, Ingo Molnar <>, "H. Peter Anvin" <>, "the arch/x86 maintainers" <>, linux-kbuild <>, LKML <>, linux-m68k <>, Linux MIPS Mailing List <>, Linux-sh list <>, uml-devel <>
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=pJyBrcPFSyccfAiHHWgyNVyWLgEf49vcn7M7zs42DGs=; b=ImzpfxsJfaZJ2CcGcNeDgHkwJZSzCFCzdQEE+/1uyFXa/pDdEeERaQObeXESBylII+ 7pBV0XM2BDYwCl/Hj7Qnjf4ryXwB8GODc16uHIH9uoXQNWkYF/07YtJH13T8rN9APGON 9t/gQcgsqPcI+g7JnEu2jn5OnGBEW8Gitc7qx03K8CMvoDWShDud+g4GpqXMIlzS2H2V FhQLZhsb+xTauviBOtVfFWjumjc3BIleHvHlg8PuwYnnD7euP8u97/Hhb5Av7Z7Kqk4m 42/IjP+91sHrKVJHZZdaidsMgdqBahmBSbCJqwKvBrH6WA5njqr3nJYv32Fb9/se9hWG eZCw==
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <>
List-help: <>
List-id: linux-mips <>
List-owner: <>
List-post: <>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <>
List-unsubscribe: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra
<> wrote:
> Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
>> Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>> I told you already that "make defconfig ARCH=um SUBARCH=x86" will spuriously
>>> create a x86_64 config on x86_64.
>>> This breaks existing setups.
>> I'll fix this and resubmit soon.
> Wait a minute. You're now arguing about whether the generic "x86"
> means i386 or x86_64. Its meaning is already defined in
> arch/x86/Kconfig and arch/x86/um/Kconfig: see the config 64BIT. Unless
> i386 is explicitly specified, the default is to build a 64-bit kernel.
> That is already defined for a normal Linux kernel, and user-mode Linux
> should not break that convention. So, in the example you pulled out of
> your hat:
>   $ make defconfig ARCH=um SUBARCH=x86
> the user should expect a 64-bit build, and not an i386 build as you
> say. Both my patches are correct, and the "regression" that you
> pointed out is a red herring.

Sorry for chiming in, but... what about cross compiling?
SUBARCH=x86 should give you a 32-bit ia32 kernel, right?



Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 --

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

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