From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/27] asm-generic: add legacy I/O header files Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 15:20:33 +0200 Message-ID: <200905011520.34097.arnd@arndb.de> References: <200905011453.32006.arnd@arndb.de> <20090501141414.4adfe4ab@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090501141414.4adfe4ab@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: Russell King , Michal Simek , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Remis Lima Baima , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Friday 01 May 2009, Alan Cox wrote: > Currently if you create a new architecture you have to figure out what > your equivalent tick rate is or you get an error for not defining it. > Ditto if you try to build code using it on platforms that it is > meaningless (eg S/390) you get an error. > > You'd lose that rather useful property. In that case, I still think it would be good to have it in asm-generic. Half the architectures define it in this way currently, and new architectures would still have to think about it before falling back on the default. Arnd <>< From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.188]:51241 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760319AbZEANUf (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 May 2009 09:20:35 -0400 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/27] asm-generic: add legacy I/O header files Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 15:20:33 +0200 References: <200905011453.32006.arnd@arndb.de> <20090501141414.4adfe4ab@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20090501141414.4adfe4ab@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-ID: <200905011520.34097.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Alan Cox Cc: Russell King , Michal Simek , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Remis Lima Baima , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20090501132033.HTYbbXPezlvNoCjd8XrGVU9rGmDfboK_THFGEV4nJds@z> On Friday 01 May 2009, Alan Cox wrote: > Currently if you create a new architecture you have to figure out what > your equivalent tick rate is or you get an error for not defining it. > Ditto if you try to build code using it on platforms that it is > meaningless (eg S/390) you get an error. > > You'd lose that rather useful property. In that case, I still think it would be good to have it in asm-generic. Half the architectures define it in this way currently, and new architectures would still have to think about it before falling back on the default. Arnd <><