From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lithops.sigma-star.at (lithops.sigma-star.at [195.201.40.130]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E331917E91C for ; Mon, 27 May 2024 15:42:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.201.40.130 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716824550; cv=none; b=Fdc0r30E1r1U6hofexwERz+qPSZPtTEYlC0acRN9AnQE17OpZV6GsukQ+OpARSdCmS1Qmpovu4xzQx0cugHrpRQJNxrOg4wQiaDzgMoyuxNTqILk1vVvQUU6wMtsQQIfhh3cYYP08lQYu9HC4vXGUx0qC8JX0J2aiyrBfljnKhA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716824550; c=relaxed/simple; bh=28FmaNaCjE0elO/iRTMp0OiBVo0Hx4KNcyRan4yjbDI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=XwT0VTJ1pqBsi6Esen3GI8rUUP81dqcYBO/yBFkUSoOnmlukEbSDPG1zzxNT/ftuDqv4OdzGrHvXI6Cbt76yP0OwtD7dTbQpLfmzzkX5XRIa9yUs38Rl3t/2C0tbofAbhxJ6CCv5sH/N5B2qHWLSG2oePc8vT65d2AFg0iybmpc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=nod.at; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=nod.at; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.201.40.130 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=nod.at Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=nod.at Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lithops.sigma-star.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02FC06195FF9; Mon, 27 May 2024 17:42:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lithops.sigma-star.at ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (lithops.sigma-star.at [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id LlCAy6Iho8sa; Mon, 27 May 2024 17:42:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lithops.sigma-star.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4187B647A806; Mon, 27 May 2024 17:42:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lithops.sigma-star.at ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (lithops.sigma-star.at [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 561CBRCjFhmw; Mon, 27 May 2024 17:42:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lithops.sigma-star.at (lithops.sigma-star.at [195.201.40.130]) by lithops.sigma-star.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 230316195FF9; Mon, 27 May 2024 17:42:18 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 17:42:18 +0200 (CEST) From: Richard Weinberger To: Jan Kiszka Cc: xenomai , upstream+xenomai@sigma-star.at Message-ID: <591173911.154468.1716824538053.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at> In-Reply-To: <25810d15-a929-496f-b3c1-6ca60caf0242@siemens.com> References: <20240525115806.12101-1-richard@nod.at> <20240525115806.12101-5-richard@nod.at> <25810d15-a929-496f-b3c1-6ca60caf0242@siemens.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/16] prepare-kernel.sh: Improve kernel tree check Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: xenomai@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.8.12_GA_3807 (ZimbraWebClient - FF97 (Linux)/8.8.12_GA_3809) Thread-Topic: prepare-kernel.sh: Improve kernel tree check Thread-Index: t2Jbonc4CTlfMQ4LlSqWGPUX4gpCcA== ----- Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mail ----- >> diff --git a/scripts/prepare-kernel.sh b/scripts/prepare-kernel.sh >> index 534531e2b..800528058 100755 >> --- a/scripts/prepare-kernel.sh >> +++ b/scripts/prepare-kernel.sh >> @@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ done >> =20 >> linux_tree=3D`cd $linux_tree && pwd` >> =20 >> -if test \! -r $linux_tree/Makefile; then >> +if test \! -r $linux_tree/kernel/kallsyms.c; then >=20 > Fine with checking for a real kernel, but this here is not my favorite > method. How about >=20 > test "$(head -1 README)" =3D "Linux kernel" >=20 > instead? My idea was that kernel/kallsyms.c is an old file which is unlikely to get renamed soon. It came via: commit e42f617ecdfc68e68b0108cd337d30224b541352 Author: Ingo Molnar Date: Thu Sep 26 03:31:07 2002 -0700 [PATCH] kksymoops-2.5.38-C9 =20 Make the kernel print out symbolic bactraces if symbol table informatio= n is available (CONFIG_KALLSYMS) and was never renamed since. README, one other hand, saw more changes. In it's current form it looks more stable, though. So, I don't have a strong opinion on this. Thanks, //richard