WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] current hg unstable tree: arch/i386/kernel/built-in.o: I

To: Harry Butterworth <harry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] current hg unstable tree: arch/i386/kernel/built-in.o: In function `safe_halt': undefined reference to `rcu_needs_cpu'
From: Hans-Christian Armingeon <mog.johnny@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:10:57 +0200
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 01:58:14 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1150367176.7703.29.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <200606131505.08077.mog.johnny@xxxxxxx> <200606151147.35249.mog.johnny@xxxxxxx> <1150367176.7703.29.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.9.3
Am Donnerstag, 15. Juni 2006 12:26 schrieben Sie:
> I was worried that I had broken a standard part of the xen build process
> when I submitted my patch but I think you are doing something that is
> not supported.
> 
> The long-term solution to your problem is clearly to complete the
> upstream merge of the xen patches with mainstream Linux.
> 
> There are some issues with making it easier for people to try to use
> non-default kernels.  It's going to make recreating bugs harder and
> may cause some spurious problems when patches apply cleanly but are
> incompatible with the chosen kernel.

So using the latest 2.6.16.x kernel isnt actually supported?

Or is that supported, but using a 2.6.17.x kernel wouldn't be supported?

Johnny

> 
> Harry.
> 
> On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 11:47 +0200, Hans-Christian Armingeon wrote:
> > Hi Harry,
> > 
> > I wanted mkbuildtree to automatically pick the patches, that are needed. 
> > Some of the 2.6.16.13 patches seem to be already in the mainline kernel 
> > tree.
> > 
> > I can cleanly apply rcu_needs_cpu_patch to 2.6.16.20.
> > 
> > Johnny
> > 
> > Am Mittwoch, 14. Juni 2006 12:55 schrieben Sie:
> > > There's a patch in patches/linux-2.6.16.13 called rcu_needs_cpu.patch
> > > which provides rcu_needs_cpu for the 2.6.16.13 kernel which is the one I
> > > tested against when I submitted the rcu_needs_cpu_patch.
> > > 
> > > I'm not sure how you are getting the 2.6.16.20 kernel.  If this is a
> > > standard part of the xen-unstable build that is supposed to work then
> > > let me know how to invoke it and I will fix up the problem.
> > > 
> > > But maybe you have pulled 2.6.16.20 manually, applied the 2.6.16.13
> > > patches manually and then done an hg pull and got the new patch in the
> > > patches directory but failed to apply it to your kernel?
> > > 
> > > Harry
> > 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel