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