Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 17:34:30 +0100
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Virtual alias cache coherency results (was: x86, ARM, PARISC, PPC, MIPS and Sparc folks please run this)
Message-ID: <20030911163430.GC29532@mail.jlokier.co.uk>
References: <20030910210416.GA24258@mail.jlokier.co.uk> <20030911101704.GA24978@malvern.uk.w2k.superh.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20030911101704.GA24978@malvern.uk.w2k.superh.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1029
Lines: 23

Richard Curnow wrote:
> >     SHMLBA not defined:		SH
> 
> What's the basis for deciding wheter SHMLBA is defined or not? There are
> definitions of SHMLBA in include/asm-sh/shmparam.h and
> include/asm-sh64/shmparam.h for the kernel.  The sh64 /usr/include/asm
> headers have effectively the same thing (not identical because the copy
> I'm looking at hasn't been synced with the latest kernel sources), and I
> assume the sh userland is OK too (haven't checked though).

That's a mistake of mine: it's defined in
include/asm-sh/sh*/shmparam.h and I didn't look there.

Userland: I'm reading the Glibc 2.3.1 source and I'm not sure if it
defines suitable SHMLBA for SH4.  There's no file in the Glibc tree,
but maybe the SH installation of Glibc includes the kernel header?

-- Jamie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/