Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268129AbUJJExa (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Oct 2004 00:53:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268128AbUJJExa (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Oct 2004 00:53:30 -0400 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([69.55.234.183]:22235 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268120AbUJJExA (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Oct 2004 00:53:00 -0400 Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 21:29:58 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Dave Airlie Cc: Jon Smirl , dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] [patch] drm core internal versioning.. Message-ID: <20041010042958.GA28025@kroah.com> References: <9e47339104100917527993026d@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1013 Lines: 29 On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 03:31:26AM +0100, Dave Airlie wrote: > > I don't want to re-implement kernel modversions which is what we are close > to doing Then why not just rely on the modversion code in the kernel tree to do this? As you say: > you can't insmod a module built against a different kernel > anyways so it doesn't matter, kernel version, preempt, smp, compiler are > all checked on insmod in 2.6 if they don't match it doesn't load it is not > possible to distrib a binarry kernel independent module.. Which is a pretty good reason not to try to implement your own versioning system, right? > without at least a portable stub source loader... Are you thinking that someone will try to do this? If so, they deserve what they get :) thanks, greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/