From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933488Ab2EUSYH (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 May 2012 14:24:07 -0400 Received: from smtp.snhosting.dk ([87.238.248.203]:59830 "EHLO smtp.domainteam.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933438Ab2EUSYC (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 May 2012 14:24:02 -0400 Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 20:24:00 +0200 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Linus Torvalds Cc: David Miller , akpm@linux-foundation.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT] Sparc Message-ID: <20120521182400.GA6043@merkur.ravnborg.org> References: <20120521.050300.1434374935904126254.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:37:23AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 2:03 AM, David Miller wrote: > > > > There is going to be a merge conflict between the commit in the > > net-next tree that adds the Sparc BPF JIT, and the one in here which > > adds arch/sparc/Kbuild.  It should be quite easy to resolve. > > Ok, so that had a very obvious resolution, and a "cleaner, but scarier" version. > > I picked the cleaner but scarier one - the one that should make the > BFP JIT be built when you do "make arch/sparc" by putting the net > thing into the new arch/sparc/Kbuild file. OK. > > I did minimal testing with "make ARCH=sparc" without actually > *building* anything, and in the process also fixed the fact that you > should not select HAVE_BPF_JIT unless networking is enabled (crappy > interface - maybe that "if NET" part really should be in the > HAVE_BPF_JIT rules, not in all the architectures?) HAVE_BPF_JIT is only used to make the BPF_JIT prompt visible. And BPF_JIT depends on NET. So the "if NET" part in the select is redundant but not strictly wrong. Sam From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sam Ravnborg Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 18:24:00 +0000 Subject: Re: [GIT] Sparc Message-Id: <20120521182400.GA6043@merkur.ravnborg.org> List-Id: References: <20120521.050300.1434374935904126254.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: Linus Torvalds Cc: David Miller , akpm@linux-foundation.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:37:23AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 2:03 AM, David Miller wrote: > > > > There is going to be a merge conflict between the commit in the > > net-next tree that adds the Sparc BPF JIT, and the one in here which > > adds arch/sparc/Kbuild. =A0It should be quite easy to resolve. >=20 > Ok, so that had a very obvious resolution, and a "cleaner, but scarier" v= ersion. >=20 > I picked the cleaner but scarier one - the one that should make the > BFP JIT be built when you do "make arch/sparc" by putting the net > thing into the new arch/sparc/Kbuild file. OK. >=20 > I did minimal testing with "make ARCH=3Dsparc" without actually > *building* anything, and in the process also fixed the fact that you > should not select HAVE_BPF_JIT unless networking is enabled (crappy > interface - maybe that "if NET" part really should be in the > HAVE_BPF_JIT rules, not in all the architectures?) HAVE_BPF_JIT is only used to make the BPF_JIT prompt visible. And BPF_JIT depends on NET. So the "if NET" part in the select is redundant but not strictly wrong. Sam