On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 18:45:11 -0400
Jeff Dike <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 11:25:37PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > This completely bogus. readb() should be present on M68K, fix the
> > platform to implement readb() for MMIO, even if your MMIO readb is a
> > moveb instruction.
> >
> > check_signature is relevant for anything with MMIO space (for example you
> > can legitimately want to check_signature a MAC68K Nubus ROM).
> >
> > S/390 is a bit of a special case as no S/390 usage of check_signature
> > appears sane but equally it isn't used so you can stub it out.
>
> This is a problem for UML too.
>
> I have a patch in my tree, which basically stubs readb, waiting to see
> how this is fixed for the other arches.
>
What a mess.
I guess we could add an empty readb() implementation to lib/lib.a so the
arch will pick that up if all else fails. But it's pretty stinky. And
it won't work either because we don't know at compile-time to declare
the prototype for that thing appropriately.
So... what's the proper fix here? "The arch must implement readb"? That's
bad: if the arch really cannot implement readb(), we want builds to fail
if someone tries to use it.
I think I'll go shopping instead.
-
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]
