RE: [Fault-injection-developer] Couple of issues downloading and building the FITH source code

[Wang, S. <sta...@in...>]

Hi, Rob

I think the reason why we used a modified version insmod is that we =
have not
enough time to complete a FITH's insmod:) And we can write a insmod =
when
time permits. And we really want :)

Thank,
Stanley=20

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Rhoads [mailto:err...@li...]
Sent: 2002=E5=B9=B410=E6=9C=8822=E6=97=A5 11:41
To: fau...@li...
Cc: Zhuang, Louis; Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky; Wang, Frank
Subject: RE: [Fault-injection-developer] Couple of issues downloading =
and
building the FITH source code


On Mon, 2002-10-21 at 20:05, Rob Rhoads wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-10-21 at 19:54, Zhuang, Louis wrote:
> > I agree totally. We'll change README and INSTALL against stock =
kernel
> > 2.4/2.5.=20

Upon further reflection...just so I'm even more clear (sorry if you
already knew this):

At a minimum, break FITH out into 2 packages:

1. One for kernel patches, kernel modules, plus kernel related build
instructions.

2. One for user-space components, plus build scripts (configure file) &
instructions

IOW don't package FITH up as a single tarball that contains both kernel
and user-space components, and one big README for building both.
Bundling them together just isn't a good idea from a Linux kernel
developers perspective.

Also, can you explain why we aren't modifying & using dprobes? Why are
we instead using a modified version of insmod? With your current FITH
implementation, can you inject faults in statically compiled/linked
drivers or kernel code (e.g. not just kernel modules)?=20

I have concerns that using a modified insmod, won't fly with kernel
developers. If dprobes isn't sufficient, why can't it be modified, so =
we
don't have to use a modified version of insmod. I may be drawing the
wrong conclusion here, so don't change it until you explain it.=20

Anyone should feel free to jump-in in this discussion, if you
disagree/agree or whatever.

> >=20
> Just to clarify, I never expected FIFTH to work on the kernel that
> shipped with RH 8.0. Just that I could build both a stock kernel w/
> relevant patches, and the FIFTH user-space components on a RH 8.0
> system.=20
>=20
> So it sounds like we are then in agreement. Cool. ;-)
>=20

--=20
Rob Rhoads                     mailto:err...@li...
Telecom Software Platforms     office: 503-677-5498
Intel Communications Group

<disclaimer value=3D"pointless">
This email message solely contains my own personal views,=20
and not necessarily those of my employer.
</disclaimer>



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net emial is sponsored by: Influence the future=20
of  Java(TM) technology. Join the Java Community=20
Process(SM) (JCP(SM)) program now.=20
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;4699841;7576298;k?http://www.sun.com/javav=
ote
_______________________________________________
Fault-injection-developer mailing list
Fau...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fault-injection-developer