[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.0-testing test] 2061: regressions - FAIL
On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 19:04 +0100, Brendan Cully wrote: > On Friday, 03 September 2010 at 18:55, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Brendan Cully writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.0-testing test] 2061: > > regressions - FAIL"): > > > Until the kernel modules are in their proper place, I think a less > > > drastic fix for your test suites would be to edit > > > tools/remus/kmod/Makefile and change > > > > > > test -d $(KERNELDIR) > > > > > > to > > > > > > test -f $(KERNELDIR)/Module.symvers > > > > > > which will still silently fail to build the modules if tools/remus > > > builds too early, but should suppress failure warnings. Completely > > > untested. > > > > I don't think this is reliable, is it ? As that .symvers file can be > > created before the kernel build is complete. So we can still reenter > > the whole kernel build. > > What do you mean 'reenter the whole kernel build'? Are you under the > impression that the kmod tree is somehow actually building in the > kernel build directory? > > As I said in an earlier email, it doesn't do that. It is just using > the kernel header files, like any other third party module. Normally > you could find them under /lib/modules/foo/build, but obviously that > doesn't apply here. Out of tree module builds require a configured kernel tree, which it is not when the race is lost. You can't use the kernel headers to build modules without a .config for example since they contain various #ifdef CONFIG_FOO stuff which affects the kernel ABI. Maybe we should drop the remus stuff from tools/Makefile and add an explicit call to "make -C tools/remus" (or whatever the path is) at the appropriate place at the end of the rule which builds the kernel? Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |