Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756126AbZGAWwj (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jul 2009 18:52:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754640AbZGAWwZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jul 2009 18:52:25 -0400 Received: from mail-qy0-f193.google.com ([209.85.221.193]:41557 "EHLO mail-qy0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754534AbZGAWwY (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jul 2009 18:52:24 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4A4B49D0.2090101@monstr.eu> References: <7a92dd639b7887bc972118d16a5fda6093200b96.1245347640.git.arnd@arndb.de> <4A4B49D0.2090101@monstr.eu> Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 08:52:27 +1000 Message-ID: <1d3f23370907011552h5b3c96b9h208d5567e7a2a615@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [microblaze-uclinux] [PATCH 03/11] microblaze: fall back on generic header files for the ABI From: John Williams To: microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au Cc: LKML , Remis Lima Baima , Arnd Bergmann , John Linn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1454 Lines: 41 Hi Michal, Arnd, On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Michal Simek wrote: > Added to next branch for test. > > I had to do one change. > Microblaze needs __kernel_mode_t as short. > > + I removed __kernel_size_t and I'll recompile toolchain > for removing warning messages We need to be a little bit mindful here regarding which of the asm-generic changes we merge immediately. Ones that do not change the ABI at all, but simply pull from asm-generic instead of asm-microblaze are obviously fine (identical structures, bitfields etc). However, we've just "broken" the ABI in 2.6.31, if we merge further ABI breakage in 2.6.32 it's more pain and confusion. So, unless we can merge and validate this ABI breakage during the 2.6.31-rc cycle, I think we need to hold on changes that would break the ABI again, so soon. Longer term there will be a complete redo of glibc up to the latest version, which will obviously require a new toolchain for users - I think that is the right place to do the next round of ABI breakage. Any thoughts? John -- John Williams, PhD, B.Eng, B.IT PetaLogix - Linux Solutions for a Reconfigurable World w: www.petalogix.com p: +61-7-30090663 f: +61-7-30090663 -- 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/