Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
Zachary Amsden wrote:
This looks awesome. Are there any plans to get these
sub-architectures to work with the generic subarch? Seems the next
logical step would be putting each mach-*/*.o into separated namespaces.
I haven't looked at that. This patch was intended to be a very simple
uncontroversial rearrangement, in preparation for the Xen subarch, and
to just clean up a corner of the kernel which seems to have gotten a
bit warty. Chris just sent me your patches from March which look like
they cover a lot of the same ground, but I haven't looked at them in
detail yet.
This is cleaner than the patches I sent in March, although we want to
re-use parts of the mach-default code, not replace it entirely. Hence
my interest in the multi-subarch generic kernel. I'd be glad to look
into it.
Zach
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
