[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: Richard Weinberger <>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 13:01:27 +0200
Cc:, Michal Marek <>,,,, Jeff Dike <>, Guan Xuetao <>, Thomas Gleixner <>, Ingo Molnar <>, "H. Peter Anvin" <>,,, LKML <>,,,,
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: <> <> <> <> <>
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 
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 


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