From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933113AbXC0RA5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 13:00:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933344AbXC0RA5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 13:00:57 -0400 Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.249]:16906 "EHLO an-out-0708.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933113AbXC0RAz (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 13:00:55 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=k6iPIsvyqu5fPDSga60vjhtQOl5/ExhqT5ln9f1BggfgdbYpaRQ2W4nIK717DnoMIjohmAlrOW3qyNf8tBeOFmFvDTUY0iqiw0KxQHvfkM41v4kQ7Xxe4g3HzneNgZJB53im/xuH0EBKLvKzECFdG3068u7w/AYRNgfqyffBOTE= Message-ID: <8bd0f97a0703271000x2910b2fan573fd37bb45a058d@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 13:00:54 -0400 From: "Mike Frysinger" To: "David Howells" Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] Revoke core code: fix nommu arch compiling error bug Cc: "Pekka J Enberg" , "Andrew Morton" , bryan.wu@analog.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Hugh Dickins" , "Alan Cox" In-Reply-To: <27782.1174989913@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070326024143.a226c9b2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1174904637.32691.86.camel@roc-desktop> <6017.1174908318@redhat.com> <6791.1174909459@redhat.com> <11045.1174911764@redhat.com> <22674.1174915478@redhat.com> <8bd0f97a0703261321h356a849am1ab617f0e732fa67@mail.gmail.com> <27782.1174989913@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 3/27/07, David Howells wrote: > Note that it's not possible to shift windows around in response to faults > because fault reporting is asynchronous - the entire remaining instruction > queue will be executed *before* the exception is actually raised to the > kernel. ah that would limit the usefulness of its application in the kernel ... thanks for the info > That sounds reasonable. However, I suspect that most NOMMU CPUs won't be able > to do that. In effect you're creating a third option, I think (MMU, NOMMU, > MPU). sure, but i'm not sure the MPU option would be mutually exclusive with NOMMU ... in the Blackfin case, we'd want both ... -mike