Re: [Dri-devel] building with 2.4.0test8

[Alan H. <aho...@va...>]

Bill,

Try again,

I've just synced the tdfx-2-branch with the trunk which holds the latest
on the kernel modules.

Alan.

On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 10:07:19AM -0400, Bill White wrote:
> I can't seem to build the tdfx kernel module on the tdfx-2-1-branch
> branch with kernel 2.4.0test8.  I get these undefined symbols.
> 
> [crasher]: sudo insmod ./tdfx.o
> ./tdfx.o: unresolved symbol copy_from_user_ret
> ./tdfx.o: unresolved symbol copy_to_user_ret
> ./tdfx.o: unresolved symbol lock_kernel
> ./tdfx.o: unresolved symbol unlock_kernel
> 
> This is what I did:
> 1.) I have rebuilt and installed the kernel, and the result of
>     'uname -r' is "2.4.0-test8".
> 2.) I have also updated the tdfx-2-1-branch X tree.
> 3.) I enabled AGP and disabled DRM in the kernel.
> 4.) A grep of /proc/ksyms for the symbols above shows that there are
>     no symbols of those names, but there are __generic_copy_to_user
>     and __generic_copy_from_user symbols defined.  There are no
>     symbols which look anything like lock_kernel.
> 5.) I compiled the kernel module with this command.
>     make -f Makefile.linux \
>         TREE=/3dfx/obj/Linux/2.4.0test8/crasher/linux/include \
>         tdfx.o
>     I keep the kernel sources in /3dfx/src/Linux, and make links
>     with lndir in /3dfx/obj/Linux, just like with the X tree.  This
>     lets me keep multiple configurations of the same source tree.
> 6.) The kernel is configured without versioned symbols.  The
>     relevant lines of .config are:
> 	#
> 	# Loadable module support
> 	#
> 	CONFIG_MODULES=y
> 	# CONFIG_MODVERSIONS is not set
> 	CONFIG_KMOD=y
> 7.) The symbols copy_from_user_ret and copy_to_user_ret are not
>     defined in the kernel as far as etags can find.
> 8.) All occurrences of lock_kernel that etags can find are inlined
>     or macros, but they don't seem to be expanded that way in the
>     kernel code.  They seem to be all defined by including the
>     file smp_lock.h.  However, this file doesn't seem to be
>     included anywhere in the X tree.
>     
> 
> I think this catches all of the obvious sources of this problem.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dri-devel mailing list
> Dri...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel