Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: HugeTLB vs. SH3 cpu | From | Dave Hansen <> | Date | Wed, 02 Apr 2008 17:06:09 -0700 |
| |
On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 15:55 -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > On 02.04.2008 [17:04:48 +0900], Paul Mundt wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 04:26:14PM -0700, Nish Aravamudan wrote: > > Sorting out the mess noted by Adrian is pretty trivial with a > > HAVE_HUGETLB_PAGE. How about this? > > I'm confused, isn't the following simpler fix equivalent? > > Fix sh3 build with HUGETLBFS=y. Only SH4 and SH5 actually support > HUGETLB_PAGE (which HUGETLBFS depends on). > > Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com> > > diff --git a/fs/Kconfig b/fs/Kconfig > index d731282..1981f8e 100644 > --- a/fs/Kconfig > +++ b/fs/Kconfig > @@ -978,7 +978,7 @@ config TMPFS_POSIX_ACL > > config HUGETLBFS > bool "HugeTLB file system support" > - depends on X86 || IA64 || PPC64 || SPARC64 || (SUPERH && MMU) || BROKEN > + depends on X86 || IA64 || PPC64 || SPARC64 || ((CPU_SH4 || CPU_SH5) && MMU) || BROKEN
Yeah, that's equivalent. But, you have to draw the line at some point on how complex that "depends on" is going to get. I think you each have unique pain tolerances. :)
Personally, I kinda prefer to break it out per-arch, because that SUPERH logic is getting a bit screwy.
You could also do something like this:
> config HUGETLBFS > bool "HugeTLB file system support" > - depends on X86 || IA64 || PPC64 || SPARC64 || (SUPERH && MMU) || BROKEN > + depends on X86 || IA64 || PPC64 || SPARC64 || SUPERH_HUGETLBFS || BROKEN
And then:
config SUPERH_HUGETLBFS def_bool y depends on (CPU_SH4 || CPU_SH5) && MMU
on the arch-specific side.
-- Dave
| |