Re: CONFIG_XIP_ROM vs. CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Tim Bird wrote:

> I'm looking at some sources for kernel Execute-in-place (XIP).
> 
> I see references to CONFIG_XIP_ROM and CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL,
> in different architecture branches of the same kernel
> source tree.
> 
> Is this difference merely the result of inconsistent
> usage, or is there a functional difference between
> these two options?

It's the result of me deciding CONFIG_XIP_ROM wasn't totally appropriate ...  

> I can imagine that CONFIG_XIP_ROM is intended only to
> handle XIP in ROM, and that CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL possibly
> handles additional cases like XIP in flash.  However,
> before jumping to that conclusion I thought I would
> ask if there is some intention behind the different
> config names.

... so I renamed it to CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL.  Especially since there is also 
XIPable user space which also can be stored in ROM (or flash).  So please 
disregard CONFIG_XIP_ROM and use CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL.  Whether ROM or Flash is 
used is rather irrelevant to the code this option is linked to.


Nicolas

-
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/