Sam Ravnborg wrote:
Grouping related things together is always a good approach. But the right
factor should be used for the grouping. For the ELF file is would from a usage
perspective be natural to have constants close to the definition that
they are used to describe. Having constants grouped wi
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 10:53:39AM -0400, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Roman Zippel wrote:
> >The problem I have is that you want to separate _all_ constants, which
> >doesn't really make sense to me, because many of them are useless without
> >the correspending structures.
> >
>
> It seems cl
Roman Zippel wrote:
The problem I have is that you want to separate _all_ constants, which
doesn't really make sense to me, because many of them are useless without
the correspending structures.
It seems cleanest to just put all the constants in one place rather than
scatter them around ba
Paul Mackerras wrote:
No, it's because the bootwrapper is not part of the kernel and does
not use kernel headers. The aim is that the bootwrapper can be built
and used outside the kernel source tree, so it needs its own copies of
any headers that aren't in /usr/include.
Hm, I see. But is
Paul Mackerras wrote:
===
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/io-workarounds.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/io-workarounds.c
@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
#undef DEBUG
#include
+#include
Why is this needed? You've added #include
Jeremy Fitzhardinge writes:
> ===
> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/io-workarounds.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/io-workarounds.c
> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
> #undef DEBUG
>
> #include
> +#include
Why is this needed? You've a
Jeremy Fitzhardinge writes:
> powerpc also appears to have its own duplicate copy of elf.h in
> arch/powerpc/boot/elf.h; presumably because the standard elf.h
> brings in too much. Update it to just linux/elf-defn.h, which
> should be fine.
No, it's because the bootwrapper is not part of
Hi,
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Roman Zippel wrote:
> > This could be avoided by reordering things within elf.h, but is it really
> > necessary since there is no user of this right now?
> >
>
> Well, yes, I don't have much need to include ELF headers in asm now, but I
>
Roman Zippel wrote:
This could be avoided by reordering things within elf.h, but is it really
necessary since there is no user of this right now?
Well, yes, I don't have much need to include ELF headers in asm now, but
I still think its worth separating the arch-specific definitions from
a
Hi,
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > We have the __ASSEMBLY__ define for this, so just for asm code we don't need
> > a separate header.
> >
>
> Hm. The number of __ASSEMBLY__s end up being pretty large, and it just seemed
> cleaner to put them in separate headers.
This c
Roman Zippel wrote:
This patch cleans up the ELF headers and their users. It does several
related things:
1. split linux/elf.h into pieces
This splits linux/elf.h into several pieces:
linux/elf.h - still the common elf header,
functionally
Roman Zippel wrote:
linux/elf-const.h - ELF constants, includable by asm code
BTW who's the maniac who tries to use this in asm code?
Many of these constants are pretty useless without the corresponding
structure definitions.
I was for a while, in order to hand-craft ELF h
Hi,
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> linux/elf-const.h - ELF constants, includable by asm code
BTW who's the maniac who tries to use this in asm code?
Many of these constants are pretty useless without the corresponding
structure definitions.
bye, Roman
-
To unsubs
Hi,
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, Clemens Koller wrote:
> > glibc provides its own version, so it doesn't has to be exported at all.
>
> AFAIK the glibc folks want to rely more on the linux kernel headers
> in the future and not provide more or less redundant headers anymore...
In this case it's more an
Hi, Roman!
Roman Zippel schrieb:
Hi,
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 16:08 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
This patch cleans up the ELF headers and their users. It does several
related things:
Looks good. We can get away with exporting a lot less of this
Hi,
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 16:08 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > This patch cleans up the ELF headers and their users. It does several
> > related things:
>
> Looks good. We can get away with exporting a lot less of this to
> userspace too, can
Hi,
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> This patch cleans up the ELF headers and their users. It does several
> related things:
>
> 1. split linux/elf.h into pieces
>
> This splits linux/elf.h into several pieces:
> linux/elf.h - still the common elf header,
>
David Woodhouse wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 16:08 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
This patch cleans up the ELF headers and their users. It does several
related things:
Looks good. We can get away with exporting a lot less of this to
userspace too, can't we?
Probably. What nee
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 16:08 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> This patch cleans up the ELF headers and their users. It does several
> related things:
Looks good. We can get away with exporting a lot less of this to
userspace too, can't we?
--
dwmw2
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the l
Chris Zankel wrote:
Jeremy,
Could you please add the ELF architecture-magic number for Xtensa (94)
when you finally submit this patch?
I guess, but I think it would be better if you just sent an incremental
patch to add it. Does my patch work OK for Xtensa?
J
-
To unsubscribe from this
Jeremy,
Could you please add the ELF architecture-magic number for Xtensa (94)
when you finally submit this patch?
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
This patch cleans up the ELF headers and their users. It does several
related things:
--- /dev/null
+++ b/include/linux/elf-const.h
@@ -0,0 +1,222 @@
ian wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 16:08 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
arm26 changes acked-by: Ian Molton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Did you try building it to flush out any missing-header problems?
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a mes
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 16:08 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
arm26 changes acked-by: Ian Molton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-inf
23 matches
Mail list logo
