From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/12] allow BFLT executables on systems with a MMU To: Nicolas Pitre References: <1469042561-7360-1-git-send-email-nicolas.pitre@linaro.org> <6d7b45eb-8085-47fa-fc31-5fb26b7dd009@linux-m68k.org> Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Viro , David Howells , Russell King , One Thousand Gnomes From: Greg Ungerer Message-ID: Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 17:28:13 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 22/07/16 00:48, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Thu, 21 Jul 2016, Greg Ungerer wrote: >> Hi Nicolas, >> >> On 21/07/16 05:22, Nicolas Pitre wrote: >>> This series provides the necessary changes to allow "flat" executable >>> binaries meant for no-MMU systems to actually run on systems with a MMU. >>> Also thrown in are various cleanups to binfmt_flat.c. >> >> I got to the bottom of why I couldn't run m68k flat binaries on >> an MMU enabled m68k system. I had to fix the regs setup, with the >> patch below. With this I can now run flat binaries on my ColdFire >> MMU enabled system. > > Excellent! > >> This change is completely independent of your patch series so I'll >> push this separately via the linux-m68k list and my m68knommu git >> tree. > > OK. > > Who should merge my patch series at this point? If no-one else wants to carry it I can take it in the m68knommu git tree. But I would want to be sure everyone is good with it first. Alan: are you happy with where this is at? rmk: ok with the arm flat.h change going via another tree? Al/David: any comments on this? (Link to v4 patches here https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/7/20/508 ) Regards Greg