Is ARCH_HAS_MMU going away?
Rob Landley
rob at landley.net
Mon Aug 3 02:54:55 UTC 2009
On Sunday 02 August 2009 19:58:41 Robin Getz wrote:
> On Mon 27 Jul 2009 21:36, Rob Landley pondered:
> > I don't understand the difference between ARCH_HAS_MMU and ARCH_USE_MMU.
> > (For a kernel, sure. For a C library, not so much.)
>
> I'm not sure if you are saying they are redundant (which I understand), and
> we only need one, or if you think they both are unnecessary?
I think they're redundant.
Having ARCH_USE_MMU, and nommu support in general, makes sense for embedded
systems. But I'm unaware of any instance where userspace cares about the
difference between having and using an MMU, and I don't see it expressed
anywhere in the code either.
Rob
--
Latency is more important than throughput. It's that simple. - Linus Torvalds
More information about the uClibc
mailing list