Am 26.09.2013 15:26, schrieb Geert Uytterhoeven: > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra > <artagnon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: >>> Richard Weinberger wrote: >>>> I told you already that "make defconfig ARCH=um SUBARCH=x86" will spuriously >>>> create a x86_64 config on x86_64. >>>> This breaks existing setups. >>> >>> I'll fix this and resubmit soon. >> >> Wait a minute. You're now arguing about whether the generic "x86" >> means i386 or x86_64. Its meaning is already defined in >> arch/x86/Kconfig and arch/x86/um/Kconfig: see the config 64BIT. Unless >> i386 is explicitly specified, the default is to build a 64-bit kernel. >> That is already defined for a normal Linux kernel, and user-mode Linux >> should not break that convention. So, in the example you pulled out of >> your hat: >> >> $ make defconfig ARCH=um SUBARCH=x86 >> >> the user should expect a 64-bit build, and not an i386 build as you >> say. Both my patches are correct, and the "regression" that you >> pointed out is a red herring. > > Sorry for chiming in, but... what about cross compiling? > SUBARCH=x86 should give you a 32-bit ia32 kernel, right? Correct. Users expect from SUBARCH=x86 a i386 32bit UML kernel. Thanks, //richard
