On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:30:17 +0400 Yuri Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 18 October 2007 17:25, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > Understood. The situation here is that the boards, which required these > > > modifications, have no support in the arch/powerpc branch. So this is > > > why we made this in arch/ppc. > > > > Bit of a dilemma then. What board exactly? > > These are the Katmai and Yucca PPC440SPe-based boards (from AMCC). Hm... We should get those in. At this point in the kernel cycle, your patch would be 2.6.25 material anyway so perhaps there is some time to get Katmai and Yucca done by then. > > > > > Also, I'd rather see something along the lines of hugetlbfs support > > > > instead. > > > > > > Here I agree with Benjamin. Furthermore, IIRC the hugetlb file-system is > > > supported for PPC64 architectures only. Here we have PPC32. > > > > Well that needs fixing anyway, but ok. Also, is the modified binutils > > only required for userspace to take advantage here? Seems so, but I'd > > just like to be sure. > > You are right, for userspace only. Ok. josh _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
