On 9/29/09, Modestas Vainius <modestas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello, > > On antradienis 29 Rugsėjis 2009 15:31:54 Alan Jenkins wrote: >> Alan Jenkins wrote: >> > Alan Jenkins wrote: >> >> Modestas Vainius wrote: >> >>> Hello, >> >>> >> >>> On antradienis 29 Rugsėjis 2009 12:12:41 Alan Jenkins wrote: >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Probably not, but I think the message could be more generic like >> >>> "Incomplete data in /sys/module/*/ or failed to read /proc/modules". >> >> How about this: >> >> WARNING: /sys/module/ not present or too old, and /proc/modules does not >> exist. > > ACK. > >> >>> Ok, your intentions are much clearer now. But beware, my comment still >> >>> applies. You did not patch code in module_in_sysfs() so it will still >> >>> return 0 if /sys/module/<modulename> is present but >> >>> /sys/module/<modulename>/initstate is not present (<= 2.6.19). This is >> >>> because read_attribute() returns 0 if file is NOT present which is the >> >>> case here. Therefore, module_in_kernel() will not fallback to >> >>> module_in_procfs(), but return 0 and the bug will not be fixed. >> >> >> >> Ah. How about if I add this to the patch: >> > >> > Nevermind, that's not quite right. >> >> Ok, I've written a separate patch for this. It passes the existing >> tests, and it works for me on a mock-up of the old sysfs. > > Looks fine. Commit the whole patchset to github and I will test it on > 2.6.18. Ok, it's all up there now. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-modules" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
