Re: [PATCH] binfmt_flat: minimum support for theBlackfin relocations

Robin Getz
2007-09-21T01:44:04Z

On Thu 20 Sep 2007 11:03, David McCullough pondered:
> I would say that (a) is definately not the case. I am sure the BF guys
> will say they have been banging us on the head with changes for a long
> time and getting no where as we considered the changes to severe or out
> of line.

I don't think we have been "banging heads" with you (unless that is your
feeling?) - how about "working together, but diverting to satisfy different
needs" :)

I think that we have had more issues in the uClinux-dist (userspace and build
environment), but for kernel code, we have moved from some non-standard
(stupid) things we were doing early on to what we have today - which is as
common/standard with other archs as we can be.

Although this is slightly off topic - on the uClinux distribution side - most
of our changes are based on requirements/desires from being able to support
fdpic elf and flat formats, and to attempt to make things easier for end
users/us to use/maintain. Where we do make changes - we always send the patch
upstream and have the conversation with you (not everyone else does this),
and some/most times rework things so they are more acceptable to you. We
don't always come to an agreement - but we always have the discussion, and
are willing to move if we can make things better that still meets both our
needs/desires.

> This particular patch was trivial in comparison to others I've seen,

That is what we thought.

> it fixed all the existing arches (not something that is always done) and
> seemed a reasonable start to finally get the BF guys up and running.
> Still, happy to make it better of course ;-)

As always - we are more than happy to explore/review alternative patches if
people want to write/sumbit them.

-Robin