Add sys_wait4 to the list of exported functions.
diffstat:
s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c | 1 +
s390x/kernel/s390_ksyms.c | 1 +
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff -urN linux-2.5.51/arch/s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c linux-2.5.51-s390/arch/s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c
--- linux-2.5.51/arch/s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c Tue Dec 10 03:46:11 2002
+++ linux-2.5.51-s390/arch/s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c Thu Dec 12 18:03:43 2002
@@ -59,3 +59,4 @@
EXPORT_SYMBOL(console_mode);
EXPORT_SYMBOL(console_device);
EXPORT_SYMBOL_NOVERS(do_call_softirq);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(sys_wait4);
diff -urN linux-2.5.51/arch/s390x/kernel/s390_ksyms.c linux-2.5.51-s390/arch/s390x/kernel/s390_ksyms.c
--- linux-2.5.51/arch/s390x/kernel/s390_ksyms.c Tue Dec 10 03:46:16 2002
+++ linux-2.5.51-s390/arch/s390x/kernel/s390_ksyms.c Thu Dec 12 18:03:43 2002
@@ -83,3 +83,4 @@
EXPORT_SYMBOL(console_mode);
EXPORT_SYMBOL(console_device);
EXPORT_SYMBOL_NOVERS(do_call_softirq);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(sys_wait4);
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(sys_wait4);
Martin, hold on just a second. Last I checked, sys_wait4 was
used ONLY by a moronic code in ipvs, _and_ there was a comment
by the author above it "we are too lazy to do it properly".
Do you have a better reason to export it?
-- Pete
Pete Zaitcev wrote:
>>+EXPORT_SYMBOL(sys_wait4);
>
> Martin, hold on just a second. Last I checked, sys_wait4 was
> used ONLY by a moronic code in ipvs, _and_ there was a comment
> by the author above it "we are too lazy to do it properly".
> Do you have a better reason to export it?
Guess I'm the malefactor this time since I've sent this patch to Martin
after some email exchanges with a guy that wanted LVS to work on a s390.
I reckon I will fix the said moronic code to use a syscall wrapper for
sys_wait4() so we don't step on anyone's toes.
Regards,
Roberto Nibali, ratz
--
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln256%Pln256/snlbx]sb3135071790101768542287578439snlbxq'|dc
> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 22:19:21 +0100
> From: Roberto Nibali <[email protected]>
> >>+EXPORT_SYMBOL(sys_wait4);
> >
> > Martin, hold on just a second. Last I checked, sys_wait4 was
> > used ONLY by a moronic code in ipvs, _and_ there was a comment
> > by the author above it "we are too lazy to do it properly".
> > Do you have a better reason to export it?
>
> Guess I'm the malefactor this time since I've sent this patch to Martin
> after some email exchanges with a guy that wanted LVS to work on a s390.
> I reckon I will fix the said moronic code to use a syscall wrapper for
> sys_wait4() so we don't step on anyone's toes.
I should not have called it moronic. Everyone has schedule
constraints. I am wondering though, if the LVS and ipvs
module are maintained actively. Perhaps I owe them a patch.
-- Pete
>>>>+EXPORT_SYMBOL(sys_wait4);
>>>
>>>Martin, hold on just a second. Last I checked, sys_wait4 was
>>>used ONLY by a moronic code in ipvs, _and_ there was a comment
>>>by the author above it "we are too lazy to do it properly".
>>>Do you have a better reason to export it?
>>
>>Guess I'm the malefactor this time since I've sent this patch to Martin
>>after some email exchanges with a guy that wanted LVS to work on a s390.
>>I reckon I will fix the said moronic code to use a syscall wrapper for
>>sys_wait4() so we don't step on anyone's toes.
>
> I should not have called it moronic. Everyone has schedule
Don't worry about it. We haven't always been too kind with lost RH
piranha users in the past either ;).
> constraints. I am wondering though, if the LVS and ipvs
> module are maintained actively. Perhaps I owe them a patch.
LVS and its kernel modules are definitely actively maintained all the
way from 2.2.x to 2.5.x kernels and if you want I'll make you a 2.0.x
kernel version too. It's just that recently everybody got a bit busy and
thus new releases tend to follow each other in increasing time intervals.
A patch would always be very welcome of course.
Best regards,
Roberto Nibali, ratz
--
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln256%Pln256/snlbx]sb3135071790101768542287578439snlbxq'|dc