From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Vladimir V. Saveliev" Subject: Re: reiser4 on 2.6.13-rc6-realtime-preempt Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:13:18 +0400 Message-ID: <42FDC7BE.7000006@namesys.com> References: <20050811224503.7dbd67dd@SiRiUS.home> <42FC665D.4030802@namesys.com> <42FCF097.9090205@slaphack.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <42FCF097.9090205@slaphack.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: David Masover Cc: gimpel , reiserfs-list@namesys.com Hello David Masover wrote: > Vladimir V. Saveliev wrote: > >>>Hello > > >>>reiser4 depends on several core kernel patches. I think you did not >>>apply them. > > > What kind of symptoms would not applying them cause? I assumed that Gimpel did not apply core patches because he had compiling error: fs/built-in.o(.text+0x92999): In function `reiser4_put_super': undefined reference to `rcu_barrier'. However, the problem is that some changes are to be done to get reiser4 to work in new realtime/preempt kernels. > I grab patches > from -mm, but only the ones with "reiser4" in the name. They seem to > work with minimal tweaking on my part, and no one said anything when I > mentioned this before. They do seem solid... > You go right way. > >>>You might want to try to apply this patch >>>ftp://ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiser4-for-2.6/2.6.12/reiser4-for-2.6.12-realtime-preempt-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-29.patch.gz > > > Should I get patches from there, instead of -mm, in the future? Which > is more likely to be current for a given *stable* kernel, > reiser4-for-2.6 or -mm? reiser4-for-2.6 contains code which did not get enough stability yet. >