On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 09:45:47AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote: > I would like to say your opinion about putting together Microblaze MMU > arch to noMMU version. > > In C code will be #ifdef CONFIG_MMU ... #endif or #ifndef. > > Here is proposal for headers. The similar style is used in m68k but I > would like to have the same code > for both archs in main file. > > #ifndef _ASM_MICROBLAZE_PAGE_H > #define _ASM_MICROBLAZE_PAGE_H > > code for noMMU and MMU which is the same for both. > > #ifdef __uClinux__ > #include "page_no.h" -> noMMU specific > #else > #include "page_mm.h"-> MMU specific > #endif > #endif /* _ASM_MICROBLAZE_PAGE_H */ > There's really not that much code that you need to change in order to support nommu, as long as you designed your architecture port to be fairly compartmentalized. Take a look at some of the other architectures in-tree that support both in the same architecture backend. sh was the first to support a configurable CONFIG_MMU during the 2.5 days, but there are others now as well (though I don't know how actively the others are maintained -- nommu people tend to be even worse (!) than general embedded people at hanging around). In addition to sh, at least frv, m32r, and arm support a configurable CONFIG_MMU these days. xtensa seems to have just recently joined the club, too. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
