hi everyone , i was trying to patch kdb with CentOS 5.0 kernel
(2.6.18-8) , and had a few rejects ( which i am still trying to
resolve) ,.... but apart from the rejects during the kernel
compilation i got the following error which does not seem to have
anything to do with the rejects ............
i have got an error in a kdb module, which has nothing to do with the
rejected patches ( or so i guess ) :
kdb/modules/kdbm_pg.c: In function 'kdbm_show_page':
kdb/modules/kdbm_pg.c:349: error: implicit declaration
of function 'PageChecked'
kdb/modules/kdbm_pg.c: In function 'kdbm_inode':
kdb/modules/kdbm_pg.c:507: error: 'struct inode' has no
member named 'u'
the code(in kdb/modules/kdbm_pg.c) which is causing the second error
is something like this :
iaddr += offsetof(struct inode, u);
what i am not able to understand is that if 'u' is not a correct
member of the inode , .. then what did they( whoever wrote this piece
code) intend by 'u' ? , .....
....
and for the first error , ... i just checked out the code ....
according to the line no shown in the error .....the code is :
kdb_page_flags(page, Checked);
and i don't see any function PageChecked ....! so what can the error
actually mean ??
Thanks in advance
Satish
--
http://satish.playdrupal.com
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 11:30:41 +0530, Satish Eerpini said:
> hi everyone , i was trying to patch kdb with CentOS 5.0 kernel
> (2.6.18-8)
You might want to make sure you're using a 2.6.18-vintage kdb patch, as
trying to fit a 2.6.26 kdb onto a 2.6.18 kernel is unlikely to bring joy.
> resolve) ,.... but apart from the rejects during the kernel
> compilation i got the following error which does not seem to have
> anything to do with the rejects ............
No, the rejects during the patch are almost certainly related to your
compile errors...
> the code(in kdb/modules/kdbm_pg.c) which is causing the second error
> is something like this :
>
> iaddr += offsetof(struct inode, u);
>
> what i am not able to understand is that if 'u' is not a correct
> member of the inode , .. then what did they( whoever wrote this piece
> code) intend by 'u' ? , .....
Your kdb patch probably includes a patch to include/linux/fs.h that adds a
member 'u' to a 'struct inode'. If this generated a reject, then the member 'u'
won't be in the struct, and your compile dies...
> and for the first error , ... i just checked out the code ....
> according to the line no shown in the error .....the code is :
>
> kdb_page_flags(page, Checked);
>
> and i don't see any function PageChecked ....! so what can the error
> actually mean ??
kdb_page_flags is probably a macro that does something like:
#define kdb_page_flags(a,b) (..... Page##b)
The 'implicit declaration' is most likely a missing #include someplace,
which again hints at the rejects from a misapplied patch...
i am patching kdb-v4.4-2.6.18-common-1 and kdb-v4.4-2.6.18-i386-1
and following are the rejects i got , ... and nowhere could i make
sense for the above mentioned errors , ... am i missing on something
over here ?
include/linux/sysctl.h.rej from kdb-v4.4-2.6.18-common-1 ( i could fix
this, or so i think , ... by manually adding the macro definitions to
the header file , .... and i agree i am totally unaware of the
consequences )
***************
*** 150,155 ****
KERN_IA64_UNALIGNED=72, /* int: ia64 unaligned userland trap enable */
KERN_COMPAT_LOG=73, /* int: print compat layer messages */
KERN_MAX_LOCK_DEPTH=74,
};
--- 150,156 ----
KERN_IA64_UNALIGNED=72, /* int: ia64 unaligned userland trap enable */
KERN_COMPAT_LOG=73, /* int: print compat layer messages */
KERN_MAX_LOCK_DEPTH=74,
+ KERN_KDB=75, /* int: kdb on/off */
};
arch/i386/kernel/traps.c.rej from kdb-v4.4-2.6.18-i386-1 :
***************
*** 786,791 ****
printk(" on CPU%d, eip %08lx, registers:\n",
smp_processor_id(), regs->eip);
show_registers(regs);
printk(KERN_EMERG "console shuts up ...\n");
console_silent();
spin_unlock(&nmi_print_lock);
--- 797,805 ----
printk(" on CPU%d, eip %08lx, registers:\n",
smp_processor_id(), regs->eip);
show_registers(regs);
+ #ifdef CONFIG_KDB
+ kdb(KDB_REASON_NMI, 0, regs);
+ #endif /* CONFIG_KDB */
printk(KERN_EMERG "console shuts up ...\n");
console_silent();
spin_unlock(&nmi_print_lock);
arch/i386/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S.rej from kdb-v4.4-2.6.18-i386-1 :
***************
*** 134,139 ****
*(.con_initcall.init)
}
__con_initcall_end = .;
SECURITY_INIT
. = ALIGN(4);
__alt_instructions = .;
--- 134,144 ----
*(.con_initcall.init)
}
__con_initcall_end = .;
+ __kdb_initcall_start = .;
+ .kdb_initcall.init : AT(ADDR(.kdb_initcall.init) - LOAD_OFFSET) {
+ *(.kdb_initcall.init)
+ }
+ __kdb_initcall_end = .;
SECURITY_INIT
. = ALIGN(4);
__alt_instructions = .;
, .... i seem to be using the correct kdb patch but the rejects seem
to be the result of the fact that redhat guys have a lot of custom
patches which are added to get the redhat/CentOS kernel . Also because
i could patch kernel 2.6.18.4 without any problems what so ever .
Thanks
Satish
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 12:12 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 11:30:41 +0530, Satish Eerpini said:
>> hi everyone , i was trying to patch kdb with CentOS 5.0 kernel
>> (2.6.18-8)
>
> You might want to make sure you're using a 2.6.18-vintage kdb patch, as
> trying to fit a 2.6.26 kdb onto a 2.6.18 kernel is unlikely to bring joy.
>
>> resolve) ,.... but apart from the rejects during the kernel
>> compilation i got the following error which does not seem to have
>> anything to do with the rejects ............
>
> No, the rejects during the patch are almost certainly related to your
> compile errors...
>
>> the code(in kdb/modules/kdbm_pg.c) which is causing the second error
>> is something like this :
>>
>> iaddr += offsetof(struct inode, u);
>>
>> what i am not able to understand is that if 'u' is not a correct
>> member of the inode , .. then what did they( whoever wrote this piece
>> code) intend by 'u' ? , .....
>
> Your kdb patch probably includes a patch to include/linux/fs.h that adds a
> member 'u' to a 'struct inode'. If this generated a reject, then the member 'u'
> won't be in the struct, and your compile dies...
>
>> and for the first error , ... i just checked out the code ....
>> according to the line no shown in the error .....the code is :
>>
>> kdb_page_flags(page, Checked);
>>
>> and i don't see any function PageChecked ....! so what can the error
>> actually mean ??
>
> kdb_page_flags is probably a macro that does something like:
>
> #define kdb_page_flags(a,b) (..... Page##b)
>
> The 'implicit declaration' is most likely a missing #include someplace,
> which again hints at the rejects from a misapplied patch...
>
--
http://satish.playdrupal.com