On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 07:18, Greg Ungerer <gerg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 26/05/11 16:38, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
I was more thinking along the lines of !CONFIG_M68000&& Â!CONFIG_M68010
&& Â!CONFIG_<whatever Coldfire that doesn't support it>.
Or in this case (and probably most cases) we could just switch
to using the same positive logic. So what I had as:
#if defined(__mc68020__) || defined(__mc68030__) || \
 Âdefined(__mc68040__) || defined(__mc68060__) || defined(__mcpu32__)
becomes
#if defined(CONFIG_M68020) || defined(CONFIG_M68030) || \
 Âdefined(CONFIG_M68040) || defined(CONFIG_M68060) || \
 Âdefined(CONFIG_MCPU32)
There currently isn't a CONFIG_MCPU32, but I could easily add
that (we only have one CPU in that class currently supported,
the 68360).
The compiler setting won't matter, only what we configured.
Sam will probably like this better, he suggested using the
kernel configs initially, in
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-m68k/msg03609.html
Pure positive logic won't work in the (currently stil pathological) case you're
building a multi-platform kernel, and have both CONFIG_M68020 and a lesser
one that doesn't support cpu32 instructions selected.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
            Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
             Â Â -- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
