>From: Aurelien DEGREMONT - Stagiaire <degremont@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Dean Roehrich a écrit :
>> It's all of the 2.6.10 kernel. Is there something else you want?
>
>No, in fact, i would like less features (no kdb, but it's not really
>important). The best solution will be to have a dmapi patch which could
>be used to build our own version of Kernel 2.6.10 tree.
>Your CVS tree is not so bad, we just don't know, because its a cvs
>repository, which code is stable, which modification is not.
>Unfortunately, we're dependent of your kernel tree...
I agree, a patch would be nice. I have done this a few times in the past.
Maybe I'll do it again.
>> Are you using the kernel tree you got from oss.sgi.com? I'd like to know wh
>at
>> you're seeing.
>
>In fact, i try to extract a kernel patch from your cvs tree against
>kernel 2.6 without the kdb patch, only the xfs/dmapi modification. Maybe
> i missed something.
>
>To reproduced it, i've just to
>- load the dmapi module,
>(DO NOT load the xfs module)
>- unload the dmapi module. => modprobe segfault.
>The module is still considered loaded (still in lsmod list), but not
>usable (the symbols aren't available).
I don't do unloads of this module. So I'm sure there are lots of problems in
that area.
Dean
|