Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751963AbWHNJGU (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Aug 2006 05:06:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751962AbWHNJGU (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Aug 2006 05:06:20 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:30646 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751951AbWHNJGT (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Aug 2006 05:06:19 -0400 Subject: Re: module compiler version check still needed? From: Arjan van de Ven To: Andi Kleen Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200608130648.36178.ak@suse.de> References: <200608130648.36178.ak@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Intel International BV Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 11:06:17 +0200 Message-Id: <1155546377.2886.190.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 760 Lines: 15 On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 06:48 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > Does anybody know of any reason why we would still need the compiler version > check during module loading? AFAIK on i386 it was only needed to handle > 2.95 (which got dropped) and on x86-64 it was never needed. Is there > a need on any other architecture for it? is there any harm in doing this check? Checking this for sure rules out MANY nasty and really hard to debug corner cases... and there shouldn't be any valid reason for doing this ever anyway... - 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/