On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 14:28 +0100, James Pearson wrote: > Johnny Hughes wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 13:40 +0100, James Pearson wrote: > > > >>Johnny Hughes wrote: > >> > >>>On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 03:56 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>On Thu, 2006-05-25 at 22:42 +0100, James Pearson wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>On 25/05/06, Fong Vang <sudoyang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>The xfs kernel modules at dev.centos.org are very handy. There are a > >>>>>>couple of xfs modules in the 4.3 x86_64 directory, but I don't think > >>>>>>it's for the x86_64 4.3 kernel (2.6.9-34). The latest ones in that > >>>>>>directory is for the -22 kernel (I believe this came with CentOS 4.2). > >>>>> > >>>>>Get one of the kernel-module-xfs SRPMS (doesn't matter which one, they > >>>>>are the same), install it and then edit the kernel-module-xfs.spec > >>>>>file and comment out the line: > >>>>> > >>>>>%patch6 -p1 > >>>>> > >>>>>(or, use the patch to the spec file attached) > >>>>> > >>>>>and then build the RPM using something like: > >>>>> > >>>>>rpmbuild --target x86_64 --define "kernel_topdir /lib/modules/2.6.9-34/build" \ > >>>>>kernel-module-xfs.spec > >>>>> > >>>>>see: ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/testing/RHEL4/README > >>>>> > >>>>>I was given these instructions by Eric Sandeen @ SGI > >>>>> > >>>>>I've been using 2.6.9-34 with XFS compiled in this way ... > >>>>> > >>>>>James Pearson > >>>> > >>>>Dang ... did I not publish those? > >>>> > >>>>I will check now, and if they are not published, then I will do so. > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>>OK ... should be some good xfs kernel modules for all the kernels now. > >> > >>The spec file still applies %patch6 for the 2.6.9-34 kernels - I was > >>under the impression that this patch was not needed with the RHEL4U3 > >>(and above) kernels ... although this may now not be the case. > >> > > > > > > It works this way, though if upstream has properly patched up fs/direct- > > io.c it may no longer be required. > > > > I have contacted SGI and asked for any other mods that they might have > > too. > > > > If they give me any, I'll rebuild the modules. > > > > Thanks for the input ... > > This is from an email from Eric Sandeen: > > I put this blurb into the spec so it will build against both eras of EL4 > kernels: > > # Updated dio locking scheme appeared in RHEL4U3; so did > DIO_CLUSTER_LOCKING, > # which we can use as a marker. > # (actual changes we need were in direct-io.c, it's not in kernel-dev > package) > # "older_dio_locking" is then 1 if we're building against an un-updated > kernel > %define older_dio_locking %(grep -q DIO_CLUSTER_LOCKING > %{kernel_topdir}/include/linux/fs.h; echo $?) > > and then wrapped the proper patch: > > Patch6 : xfs_direct_io_locking.patch > > ... > > %if %{older_dio_locking} > %patch6 -p1 > %endif > > > I included this as a patch to the spec file eariler in this thread > > James Pearson > _______________________________________________ James, For the record, this patch is indeed removable from builds newer than 2.6.9-34.EL It has been tested and rolled in the latest kernel-module-xfs files in http://dev.centos.org/centos/4/testing (the versions kernel-module-xfs-2.6.9-34.EL-0.1-3 and kernel-module- xfs-2.6.9-34.0.1.EL-0.1-3 ... also smp, hugemem, largesmp of the same versions) Thanks, Johnny Hughes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
