Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH] UML - support checkstack

[Blaisorblade <blaisorblade@yahoo.it>]

On Tuesday 15 August 2006 05:17, Jeff Dike wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 11:45:48AM -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
> > > SUBARCH has a different meaning here.  For UML, it's the underlying,
> > > host, architecture, not a variant architecture like Voyager.
> >
> > Right, so it sounds like this breaks Voyager. Which I think means we
> > ought to pass ARCH and SUBARCH and do the right thing inside
> > checkstack.
>
> There is no use of the symbol SUBARCH in arch/i386.  While this may be
> jarring to people who know and love Voyager, it doesn't break
> anything.
>
> We could do what you suggest, but that sounds unnecessary.
>
> I'd rather either
> 	leave things as they are
Yes, and make the script check if it ARCH=um or not (which is obvious for 
now - nobody really wants a clear abstraction here).
> 	rename SUBARCH

-- 
Inform me of my mistakes, so I can keep imitating Homer Simpson's "Doh!".
Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade
http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade
Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! 
 http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/