Re: [Linux-ia64] 2.4.4 - cannot compile parport module

From: Keith Owens <kaos_at_ocs.com.au>
Date: 2001-05-19 01:02:20
On Fri, 18 May 2001 07:45:09 -0700, 
David Mosberger <davidm@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 18 May 2001 20:28:17 +1000, Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au> said:
>
>  Keith> IMHO this is correct, all modules should have unwind data,
>  Keith> but if it makes sense for a module to have no unwind data
>  Keith> then I need to patch arch_init_module() - David?
>
>Technicaly it's legal not to have an unwind section.  The unwind
>conventions define default rules for this case.  OTOH, a missing
>unwind section is almost always a sign that something got miscompiled.
>Perhaps a warning is in place?

OK, I will patch modutils and arch_init_module() accordingly.

>On a related note: let me emphasize that it is *essential* to build
>kernel modules with the same options as the modules that are included
>in the kernel source tree.  Otherwise, you may end up with an unstable
>system (e.g., if the -mfixed* options aren't specified).

My 2.5 Makefile rewrite will make this a lot safer.  It supports
separate compilation of kernel and module code, using the existing
kernel build structure, so it guarantees that third party code is
compiled exactly the same as the rest of the kernel.  It will not stop
people compiling separate code using home grown methods (and generating
errors), but why would they bother anymore?
Received on Fri May 18 08:02:42 2001

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:04 EST