Re: [Linux-am33-list] [PATCH 0/2] MN10300: Add the MN10300 architecture to Linux kernel [try #2]

[Suzuki Takashi]

Sorry for the late.

On 10/31/07, David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > But is there any utility that depends on that uname says mn10300?
>
> autoconf:-)

I forgot again the one as an host environment. :-)
AFAIK, mn10300 series are for embedded systems and I've never heard as
development hosts.
I had noticed the new machine name needs to be added / changed, though.

> Can you guarantee there won't be any non-AM33 variants of mn10300 that need
> supporting?  An AM34, perhaps?

I think `am33' is a reasonable name if  it is the first variant of
mn10300 series
that is supported by Linux, like `am33' is for glibc and `i386' is
(was) for Linux and others.
People don't misunderstand that an AM30, AM31 or AM32 is supported by Linux.
AM3n seems to be upper compatible with AM3(n-1), so far.
MEI (and only they) know if AM34, and any newer core in that series
are compatible with AM33.

> The discrepancy has been around for years, and I suspect it's not going to
> change now.  If MEI ask, I will change it.

I see.
I know there is no technical problem if the arch name continues to be mn10300.
It is an issue of some branding strategy, or a designing policy.
I understand you (RH) are not in a position to decide to change, nor
to refuse to change.

I just noticed and became worried about the mismatch.
If MEI ask you to change the toolchain name from am33 to mn10300, I
have no objection to that.
I'd be glad to hear any comments from MEI.


-- 
Suzuki Takashi
Japan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/