From: Robin Getz <rgetz@blackfin.uclinux.org>
Organization: Blackfin uClinux org
To: David McCullough <David_Mccullough@securecomputing.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] binfmt_flat: minimum support for theBlackfin relocations
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 21:44:16 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5
Cc: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>, Bernd Schmidt <bernds_cb1@t-online.de>,
       uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org, bryan.wu@analog.com,
       Bernd Schmidt <bernd.schmidt@analog.com>,
       Greg Ungerer <gerg@snapgear.com>,
       Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, ysato@users.sourceforge.jp,
       miles@lsi.nec.co.jp, linux-m32r@ml.linux-m32r.org
References: <1190102965.4406.9.camel@roc-desktop> <20070920142543.GA3268@linux-sh.org> <20070920150314.GA27079@securecomputing.com>
In-Reply-To: <20070920150314.GA27079@securecomputing.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200709202144.16301.rgetz@blackfin.uclinux.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2006
Lines: 42

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
-
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/