Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
"H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Andi Kleen wrote: >>> A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C, >>> though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way. >> >> That would require a new compiler, right? I don't think that would >> make users very happy. >> >> Besides the code is not exactly that maintenance intensive and only >> changes rarely so I don't need a pressing need to rewrite it > > No, it would not need a new compiler. All it requires is gcc plus a > reasonably recent binutils which you need anyway. There opportunities to enhance this code without writing it in C. Such as building the code out comprehensible single of subroutines, with a well defined calling sequence. The big benefit when you can go to C is that you can include headers from elsewhere in the kernel and since setup.S is increasingly becoming optional it has a fixed interface to the rest of the kernel, so there is much less opportunity for enhancement there. Eric - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
WANG Cong wrote: > On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 10:27:47PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > Thanks! I will take a look at that file. > > Maybe we can rewrite them in C, use a 16-bit C compiler to generate AT asm > code and finally push the asm code in the kernel source tree. But perhaps > there is no such ideal compiler. ;) > No, that would be bad. -hpa - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
Andi Kleen wrote: >> A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C, >> though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way. > > That would require a new compiler, right? I don't think that would > make users very happy. > > Besides the code is not exactly that maintenance intensive and only > changes rarely so I don't need a pressing need to rewrite it No, it would not need a new compiler. All it requires is gcc plus a reasonably recent binutils which you need anyway. -hpa - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
> > A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C, > though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way. That would require a new compiler, right? I don't think that would make users very happy. Besides the code is not exactly that maintenance intensive and only changes rarely so I don't need a pressing need to rewrite it -Andi - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 10:27:47PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> "H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C, >>> though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way. >> >> Is this using the .code16gcc? Or are you thinking of some other >> technique. Requiring another C compiler to build the kernel would >> be a pain to use. > >.code16gcc was what I was using. There is a GSoC project that I'm >mentoring to get 16-bit support for gcc, that will be possible to >eventually migrate to (for code size) if/when it gets implemented and >gets pushed out far enough, but that's for the future. > > -hpa Thanks! I will take a look at that file. Maybe we can rewrite them in C, use a 16-bit C compiler to generate AT asm code and finally push the asm code in the kernel source tree. But perhaps there is no such ideal compiler. ;) - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 10:27:47PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: Eric W. Biederman wrote: H. Peter Anvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C, though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way. Is this using the .code16gcc? Or are you thinking of some other technique. Requiring another C compiler to build the kernel would be a pain to use. .code16gcc was what I was using. There is a GSoC project that I'm mentoring to get 16-bit support for gcc, that will be possible to eventually migrate to (for code size) if/when it gets implemented and gets pushed out far enough, but that's for the future. -hpa Thanks! I will take a look at that file. Maybe we can rewrite them in C, use a 16-bit C compiler to generate ATT asm code and finally push the asm code in the kernel source tree. But perhaps there is no such ideal compiler. ;) - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C, though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way. That would require a new compiler, right? I don't think that would make users very happy. Besides the code is not exactly that maintenance intensive and only changes rarely so I don't need a pressing need to rewrite it -Andi - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
WANG Cong wrote: On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 10:27:47PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: Thanks! I will take a look at that file. Maybe we can rewrite them in C, use a 16-bit C compiler to generate ATT asm code and finally push the asm code in the kernel source tree. But perhaps there is no such ideal compiler. ;) No, that would be bad. -hpa - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
Andi Kleen wrote: A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C, though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way. That would require a new compiler, right? I don't think that would make users very happy. Besides the code is not exactly that maintenance intensive and only changes rarely so I don't need a pressing need to rewrite it No, it would not need a new compiler. All it requires is gcc plus a reasonably recent binutils which you need anyway. -hpa - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
H. Peter Anvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Andi Kleen wrote: A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C, though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way. That would require a new compiler, right? I don't think that would make users very happy. Besides the code is not exactly that maintenance intensive and only changes rarely so I don't need a pressing need to rewrite it No, it would not need a new compiler. All it requires is gcc plus a reasonably recent binutils which you need anyway. There opportunities to enhance this code without writing it in C. Such as building the code out comprehensible single of subroutines, with a well defined calling sequence. The big benefit when you can go to C is that you can include headers from elsewhere in the kernel and since setup.S is increasingly becoming optional it has a fixed interface to the rest of the kernel, so there is much less opportunity for enhancement there. Eric - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
Eric W. Biederman wrote: > "H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C, >> though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way. > > Is this using the .code16gcc? Or are you thinking of some other > technique. Requiring another C compiler to build the kernel would > be a pain to use. .code16gcc was what I was using. There is a GSoC project that I'm mentoring to get 16-bit support for gcc, that will be possible to eventually migrate to (for code size) if/when it gets implemented and gets pushed out far enough, but that's for the future. -hpa - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
"H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C, > though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way. Is this using the .code16gcc? Or are you thinking of some other technique. Requiring another C compiler to build the kernel would be a pain to use. Eric - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
Eric W. Biederman wrote: > WANG Cong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Thanks for your point. >> I know little about virtualization, maybe can't help much. But I am >> interested >> in other things you mentioned. AFAIK, segments can't be avoided on i386, and >> Linux uses them very little, how are they recalculated constantly? > > Look in arch/i386/boot/setup.S it runs in 16bit mode. We are talking about > real mode segments not 16bit segments. > > 16bit real mode is a completely different ball game, and why we keep BIOS > calls isolated to that one dinky file. > A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C, though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way. -hpa - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
WANG Cong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Thanks for your point. > I know little about virtualization, maybe can't help much. But I am interested > in other things you mentioned. AFAIK, segments can't be avoided on i386, and > Linux uses them very little, how are they recalculated constantly? Look in arch/i386/boot/setup.S it runs in 16bit mode. We are talking about real mode segments not 16bit segments. 16bit real mode is a completely different ball game, and why we keep BIOS calls isolated to that one dinky file. Eric - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 06:12:43PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >WANG Cong wrote: >>> >>> I have considered myself as a rather unofficial maintainer of this code, >>> and wouldn't mind make it official now when I actually have a job which >>> both cares about and actually can support my upstream Linux activities, >>> which was a major pain for a while. >>> >>> Overall, there is a lot of cleanup which really is needed in the i386 >>> boot process; I have done some work on it already, but more is needed. >> >> Sounds interesting. Can you point me what needs to be done exactly? Maybe I >> can help you. ;) > >There was a long thread on the linux-virtualization list >(@lists.linux-foundation.org) just a few days ago. The biggest single >issue right now is probably how we transition from the bootup page >tables to the "real" init_mm page tables, but the real-mode code also >needs a massive overhaul (especially so since this code can and should >be shared with x86-64); in particular I really want to get rid of the >insane segment handling, where segments are constantly recalculated for >no good reason. > >For the real-mode stuff, I have some patches already in the works for >this. Eric W. Biederman has also done a lot of work in this area. > > -hpa Thanks for your point. I know little about virtualization, maybe can't help much. But I am interested in other things you mentioned. AFAIK, segments can't be avoided on i386, and Linux uses them very little, how are they recalculated constantly? Regards! - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
WANG Cong wrote: >> >> I have considered myself as a rather unofficial maintainer of this code, >> and wouldn't mind make it official now when I actually have a job which >> both cares about and actually can support my upstream Linux activities, >> which was a major pain for a while. >> >> Overall, there is a lot of cleanup which really is needed in the i386 >> boot process; I have done some work on it already, but more is needed. > > Sounds interesting. Can you point me what needs to be done exactly? Maybe I > can help you. ;) There was a long thread on the linux-virtualization list (@lists.linux-foundation.org) just a few days ago. The biggest single issue right now is probably how we transition from the bootup page tables to the "real" init_mm page tables, but the real-mode code also needs a massive overhaul (especially so since this code can and should be shared with x86-64); in particular I really want to get rid of the insane segment handling, where segments are constantly recalculated for no good reason. For the real-mode stuff, I have some patches already in the works for this. Eric W. Biederman has also done a lot of work in this area. -hpa - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 04:13:01PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >Michael McConnell wrote: >> Hi folks, >> >> I noticed the MAINTAINERS file still lists Riley Williams as the >> maintainer of the i386 boot code, presumably as no-one else has taken it >> up in his absence (though, I'm sure it's probably been touched since >> late 2004). >> >> If I knew the first thing about the i386 boot process I would volunteer, >> but sadly I don't >> >> This article below details the reason for his absence, but please make >> sure you're sitting down before clicking. (It is work-safe.) >> http://www.chorleytoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=81=905248 >> > >Dear. > >I have considered myself as a rather unofficial maintainer of this code, >and wouldn't mind make it official now when I actually have a job which >both cares about and actually can support my upstream Linux activities, >which was a major pain for a while. > >Overall, there is a lot of cleanup which really is needed in the i386 >boot process; I have done some work on it already, but more is needed. > Sounds interesting. Can you point me what needs to be done exactly? Maybe I can help you. ;) Have fun! - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
Michael McConnell wrote: > Hi folks, > > I noticed the MAINTAINERS file still lists Riley Williams as the > maintainer of the i386 boot code, presumably as no-one else has taken it > up in his absence (though, I'm sure it's probably been touched since > late 2004). > > If I knew the first thing about the i386 boot process I would volunteer, > but sadly I don't > > This article below details the reason for his absence, but please make > sure you're sitting down before clicking. (It is work-safe.) > http://www.chorleytoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=81=905248 > Dear. I have considered myself as a rather unofficial maintainer of this code, and wouldn't mind make it official now when I actually have a job which both cares about and actually can support my upstream Linux activities, which was a major pain for a while. Overall, there is a lot of cleanup which really is needed in the i386 boot process; I have done some work on it already, but more is needed. -hpa - 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/
MAINTAINERS file out of date?
Hi folks, I noticed the MAINTAINERS file still lists Riley Williams as the maintainer of the i386 boot code, presumably as no-one else has taken it up in his absence (though, I'm sure it's probably been touched since late 2004). If I knew the first thing about the i386 boot process I would volunteer, but sadly I don't This article below details the reason for his absence, but please make sure you're sitting down before clicking. (It is work-safe.) http://www.chorleytoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=81=905248 Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. -- -- Michael "Soruk" McConnell Eridani Star System - http://www.eridani.co.uk/ - 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/
MAINTAINERS file out of date?
Hi folks, I noticed the MAINTAINERS file still lists Riley Williams as the maintainer of the i386 boot code, presumably as no-one else has taken it up in his absence (though, I'm sure it's probably been touched since late 2004). If I knew the first thing about the i386 boot process I would volunteer, but sadly I don't This article below details the reason for his absence, but please make sure you're sitting down before clicking. (It is work-safe.) http://www.chorleytoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=81ArticleID=905248 Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. -- -- Michael Soruk McConnell Eridani Star System - http://www.eridani.co.uk/ - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
Michael McConnell wrote: Hi folks, I noticed the MAINTAINERS file still lists Riley Williams as the maintainer of the i386 boot code, presumably as no-one else has taken it up in his absence (though, I'm sure it's probably been touched since late 2004). If I knew the first thing about the i386 boot process I would volunteer, but sadly I don't This article below details the reason for his absence, but please make sure you're sitting down before clicking. (It is work-safe.) http://www.chorleytoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=81ArticleID=905248 Dear. I have considered myself as a rather unofficial maintainer of this code, and wouldn't mind make it official now when I actually have a job which both cares about and actually can support my upstream Linux activities, which was a major pain for a while. Overall, there is a lot of cleanup which really is needed in the i386 boot process; I have done some work on it already, but more is needed. -hpa - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 04:13:01PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: Michael McConnell wrote: Hi folks, I noticed the MAINTAINERS file still lists Riley Williams as the maintainer of the i386 boot code, presumably as no-one else has taken it up in his absence (though, I'm sure it's probably been touched since late 2004). If I knew the first thing about the i386 boot process I would volunteer, but sadly I don't This article below details the reason for his absence, but please make sure you're sitting down before clicking. (It is work-safe.) http://www.chorleytoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=81ArticleID=905248 Dear. I have considered myself as a rather unofficial maintainer of this code, and wouldn't mind make it official now when I actually have a job which both cares about and actually can support my upstream Linux activities, which was a major pain for a while. Overall, there is a lot of cleanup which really is needed in the i386 boot process; I have done some work on it already, but more is needed. Sounds interesting. Can you point me what needs to be done exactly? Maybe I can help you. ;) Have fun! - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
WANG Cong wrote: I have considered myself as a rather unofficial maintainer of this code, and wouldn't mind make it official now when I actually have a job which both cares about and actually can support my upstream Linux activities, which was a major pain for a while. Overall, there is a lot of cleanup which really is needed in the i386 boot process; I have done some work on it already, but more is needed. Sounds interesting. Can you point me what needs to be done exactly? Maybe I can help you. ;) There was a long thread on the linux-virtualization list (@lists.linux-foundation.org) just a few days ago. The biggest single issue right now is probably how we transition from the bootup page tables to the real init_mm page tables, but the real-mode code also needs a massive overhaul (especially so since this code can and should be shared with x86-64); in particular I really want to get rid of the insane segment handling, where segments are constantly recalculated for no good reason. For the real-mode stuff, I have some patches already in the works for this. Eric W. Biederman has also done a lot of work in this area. -hpa - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 06:12:43PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: WANG Cong wrote: I have considered myself as a rather unofficial maintainer of this code, and wouldn't mind make it official now when I actually have a job which both cares about and actually can support my upstream Linux activities, which was a major pain for a while. Overall, there is a lot of cleanup which really is needed in the i386 boot process; I have done some work on it already, but more is needed. Sounds interesting. Can you point me what needs to be done exactly? Maybe I can help you. ;) There was a long thread on the linux-virtualization list (@lists.linux-foundation.org) just a few days ago. The biggest single issue right now is probably how we transition from the bootup page tables to the real init_mm page tables, but the real-mode code also needs a massive overhaul (especially so since this code can and should be shared with x86-64); in particular I really want to get rid of the insane segment handling, where segments are constantly recalculated for no good reason. For the real-mode stuff, I have some patches already in the works for this. Eric W. Biederman has also done a lot of work in this area. -hpa Thanks for your point. I know little about virtualization, maybe can't help much. But I am interested in other things you mentioned. AFAIK, segments can't be avoided on i386, and Linux uses them very little, how are they recalculated constantly? Regards! - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
WANG Cong [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks for your point. I know little about virtualization, maybe can't help much. But I am interested in other things you mentioned. AFAIK, segments can't be avoided on i386, and Linux uses them very little, how are they recalculated constantly? Look in arch/i386/boot/setup.S it runs in 16bit mode. We are talking about real mode segments not 16bit segments. 16bit real mode is a completely different ball game, and why we keep BIOS calls isolated to that one dinky file. Eric - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
Eric W. Biederman wrote: WANG Cong [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks for your point. I know little about virtualization, maybe can't help much. But I am interested in other things you mentioned. AFAIK, segments can't be avoided on i386, and Linux uses them very little, how are they recalculated constantly? Look in arch/i386/boot/setup.S it runs in 16bit mode. We are talking about real mode segments not 16bit segments. 16bit real mode is a completely different ball game, and why we keep BIOS calls isolated to that one dinky file. A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C, though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way. -hpa - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
H. Peter Anvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C, though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way. Is this using the .code16gcc? Or are you thinking of some other technique. Requiring another C compiler to build the kernel would be a pain to use. Eric - 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/
Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
Eric W. Biederman wrote: H. Peter Anvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C, though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way. Is this using the .code16gcc? Or are you thinking of some other technique. Requiring another C compiler to build the kernel would be a pain to use. .code16gcc was what I was using. There is a GSoC project that I'm mentoring to get 16-bit support for gcc, that will be possible to eventually migrate to (for code size) if/when it gets implemented and gets pushed out far enough, but that's for the future. -hpa - 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/
