public inbox for linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg Ungerer <gerg@snapgear.com>
To: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Cc: Linux/m68k <linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Development <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Steven King <sfking00@yahoo.com>,
	uClinux development list <uclinux-dev@uclinux.org>,
	Greg Ungerer <gerg@uclinux.org>,
	Greg Ungerer <gregungerer@westnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: merge of m68knommu and m68k arch branches?
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 22:01:53 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D5E5FB1.1000404@snapgear.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110218074401.GA26836@merkur.ravnborg.org>

Hi Sam,

On 18/02/11 17:44, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 10:07:25AM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I would like to put up for discussion a merge of the m68knommu and
>> m68k arch branches.
>>
>> Attached is a script and patch that does a kind of brute force
>> simplistic merge of the directories and files. (Thanks to Stephen King
>> <sfking@fdwdc.com>  for the initial version of this script, and to
>> Sam Ravnborg for the m68k includes merge script this was based on).
>> Nothing outside of the arch/m68k and arch/m68knommu directories is
>> touched, and in the end there is no more arch/m68knommu. To apply you
>> simply run the script from the top of a current kernel git tree (I used
>> 2.6.38-rc5 for testing) and then apply the patch.
>
> The initial version of said script was created by Arnd IIRC.

Apologies to Arnd then :-)


>> Thoughts?
> When we merged x86, sh and sparc in the past this has in all
> cases helped sharing coe between the 32 and 64 bit variants.
> There has in all cases been some code-chrunch in the beginning,
> but the result has been good.
> What as often caused some troubles has been how to configure
> the individual architectures.
>
> We have for eaxample:
> make ARCH=x86, make ARCH=i386, make ARCH=x86_64 today.
>
> Likewise for sparc we have:
> make ARCH=sparc, make ARCH=sparc32, make ARCH=sparc64
>
> So you need to consider how to deal with this for m68k.
> Maybe MMU is just an option so you only have ARCH=m68k in the end?

That is what I have currently done. CONFIG_MMU is selectable,
and there is no longer a separate ARCH=m68knommu, only ARCH=m68k.
I am fine with that, but I am interested in what opinion others
have on this.


> You do not touch upon the maintenance of the merged trees.
> Today there is different maintainers for the two archs.
> To have a transparent flow the better solution is likely that
> all m68k* patches go via one of your trees so we do not
> have two trees that deal with m68k upstream.

Yeah, I had much thought to this yet.


> I assume we will sort it all out naturally and I hope that
> we soon will have m68k and m68knommu merged!

That would be my take on it ;-)
I am happy to charge ahead and let the maintenance/flow work
itself out.

Thanks
Greg


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Ungerer  --  Principal Engineer        EMAIL:     gerg@snapgear.com
SnapGear Group, McAfee                      PHONE:       +61 7 3435 2888
8 Gardner Close                             FAX:         +61 7 3217 5323
Milton, QLD, 4064, Australia                WEB: http://www.SnapGear.com

  reply	other threads:[~2011-02-18 12:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-02-18  0:07 merge of m68knommu and m68k arch branches? Greg Ungerer
2011-02-18  7:44 ` Sam Ravnborg
2011-02-18 12:01   ` Greg Ungerer [this message]
2011-02-21 21:43     ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-21 21:57       ` Sam Ravnborg
2011-02-18 11:27 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-02-18 15:24   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-02-18 22:12     ` Greg Ungerer
2011-02-19  8:39       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-02-20 23:53         ` Greg Ungerer
2011-02-21  7:41           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-03-17 23:59             ` Greg Ungerer
2011-03-18  7:24               ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-02-21 21:18 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-02-22  2:05   ` Greg Ungerer
2011-02-22  7:14     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-02-22  7:29       ` Sam Ravnborg
2011-02-22  7:40         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-02-22  8:04           ` Sam Ravnborg
2011-02-22  9:16     ` Thomas Gleixner

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4D5E5FB1.1000404@snapgear.com \
    --to=gerg@snapgear.com \
    --cc=gerg@uclinux.org \
    --cc=gregungerer@westnet.com.au \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
    --cc=sfking00@yahoo.com \
    --cc=uclinux-dev@uclinux.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox