public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/11 v3] enable "make ARCH=x86"
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 17:44:47 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071110084447.GA18780@linux-sh.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47356AD5.4070102@garzik.org>

On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 03:24:53AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Paul Mundt wrote:
> >This is one of the things I've been wondering about with an sh/sh64
> >unification, as we have no option but having completely different
> >toolchains, and CONFIG_64BIT=y won't work there when they are both
> >using a 32-bit ABI.
> 
> 
> IMO it seems like you ought to be able to do
> 
> 	make ARCH=sh
> 		or
> 	make ARCH=sh64
> 
> and have it do the right thing.  Ditto for ppc/ppc64, etc.
> 
> Sane, straightforward, simple, consistent with existing practice...
> 
Indeed, that's what I was intending on keeping around as a convention,
and simply overloading SRCARCH for the sh64 case. i386/x86_64 potentially
has the same issue though, and if the intent is to have a single ARCH for
both of them, I don't see how that would possibly work without
sacrificing randconfig.. unless the intended x86 convention is that one
compiler will happily handle both i386 and x86_64 without any difficulty?

The idea of a single SRCARCH and differing ARCHs for adjusting the build
semantics as we have now is quite straightforward and seems clean enough
without pushing for ARCH unification.

  reply	other threads:[~2007-11-10  8:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-11-09 23:08 [PATCH 0/11 v3] enable "make ARCH=x86" Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-09 23:20 ` [PATCH 01/11] x86: unification of cfufreq/Kconfig Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-09 23:20 ` [PATCH 02/11] x86: start unification of arch/x86/Kconfig.* Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-09 23:20 ` [PATCH 03/11] x86: arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu unification Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-09 23:20 ` [PATCH 04/11] x86: add X86_32 dependency to i386 specific symbols in Kconfig.i386 Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-09 23:20 ` [PATCH 05/11] x86: add X86_64 dependency to x86_64 specific symbols in Kconfig.x86_64 Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-09 23:20 ` [PATCH 06/11] x86: copy x86_64 specific Kconfig symbols to Kconfig.i386 Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-09 23:20 ` [PATCH 07/11] x86: move all simple arch settings to Kconfig Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-09 23:20 ` [PATCH 08/11] x86: move the rest of the menu's " Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-09 23:20 ` [PATCH 09/11] x86: enable "make ARCH=x86" Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-09 23:20 ` [PATCH 10/11] x86: drop backward compatibility symlinks to i386/boot and x86_64/boot Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-09 23:20 ` [PATCH 11/11] kbuild: sanity check the specified arch Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-10  3:23 ` [PATCH 0/11 v3] enable "make ARCH=x86" Jeff Garzik
2007-11-10  3:37   ` Randy Dunlap
2007-11-10  3:50   ` Adrian Bunk
2007-11-10  4:05   ` Brian Gerst
2007-11-10  4:12     ` Jeff Garzik
2007-11-14 20:13       ` Roman Zippel
2007-11-10  7:54   ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-10  5:26     ` Nick Piggin
2007-11-10  8:21     ` Paul Mundt
2007-11-10  8:24       ` Jeff Garzik
2007-11-10  8:44         ` Paul Mundt [this message]
2007-11-10 20:35           ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-11-10 20:46             ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-10 21:24             ` Theodore Tso
2007-11-10  9:39         ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-11-10 10:32           ` david
2007-11-10  9:21       ` Adrian Bunk
2007-11-10  9:26         ` Paul Mundt
2007-11-10  8:23     ` Jeff Garzik
2007-11-10 10:13       ` Adrian Bunk
2007-11-10 15:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-11-12 11:59 ` Frans Pop
     [not found] <9nL9f-2n8-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found] ` <9nPcU-bm-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]   ` <9nTqh-6Cw-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]     ` <9nTTh-7w5-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]       ` <9nTTh-7w5-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]         ` <9nUcv-7UA-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]           ` <9o5hA-b8-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]             ` <9o640-1rJ-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
2007-11-11 21:03               ` Bodo Eggert

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=20071110084447.GA18780@linux-sh.org \
    --to=lethal@linux-sh.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jeff@garzik.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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