[microblaze-uclinux] Re: Microblaze Linux release

[Michal Simek <monstr@xxxxxxxxx>]

>>> I think so. Sharing code among archs looks nice and this way is definitely
>>> right. But starting with communication with PowerPC guys that this code I want
>>> to use in case that this code is not in vanilla. This is not good start for
>>> doing this.
>> I have a commit queued up that moves lmb.c into the top-level lib
>> directory so other architectures can use it easily.  Dave Miller
>> wanted this so he could use it for sparc64.  That will go into Linus'
>> tree when the merge window opens and will be in 2.6.26.  So I don't
>> see any reason why microblaze couldn't use the LMB stuff.
>>
>
> Right, fair enough. I was mostly objecting to the idea of creating another
> copy of the lmb code when bootmem should be sufficient for what microblaze
> needs. Using the code from lib/lmb.c sounds fair enough when it's already
> there.
>
> One more reason for the microblaze kernel to base on top of linux-next
> instead of mainline.

For me is not difficult to use lmb from microblaze/mm or from lib if the files
are the same.

Michal Simek
___________________________
microblaze-uclinux mailing list
microblaze-uclinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Project Home Page : http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~jwilliams/mblaze-uclinux
Mailing List Archive : http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~listarch/microblaze-uclinux/