From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michal Simek Subject: Re: USE_ELF_CORE_DUMP? Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 09:17:26 +0200 Message-ID: <49F16786.7010401@petalogix.com> References: <20090423183331.GA19899@lst.de> Reply-To: michal.simek@petalogix.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.155]:19698 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752094AbZDXHRb (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Apr 2009 03:17:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090423183331.GA19899@lst.de> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Currently all architectures but microblaze unconditionally define > USE_ELF_CORE_DUMP. The microblaze ommision seems like an error to > me, so can we just kill this ifdef and make sure we are the same > everywhere? > Where did you find it? I haven't seen in in mainline (noMMU kernel). It is in my MMU patches which I want to send for review soon. For noMMU I use CONFIG_BINFMT_FLAT (binfmt_flat.c) where I don't need USE_ELF_CORE_DUMP For MMU I use CONFIG_BINFMT_ELF (binfmt_elf.c) where USE_ELF_CORE_DUMP make sense to me. Can you give me some clue what you are trying to fix? Thanks, Michal > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng) PetaLogix - Linux Solutions for a Reconfigurable World w: www.petalogix.com p: +61-7-30090663,+42-0-721842854 f: +61-7-30090663