Re: modutils 2.4.2, please test asap

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Tue, Jan 23, 2001 at 08:40:36AM +1100, Keith Owens wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:30:02 -0800, 
> David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >As it stands, we saw a bug report this morning about how 2.4 modutils
> >broke hotplugging with 2.2 kernels, since it created unusable (empty)
> >"usbmap" files ... you're not as backwards-compatible as you may
> >think you are!
> 
> Switching between kernels is not supposed to require changes to user
> space utilities.  Now you have to use modutils 2.3 on 2.2 kernels and
> modutils 2.4 on 2.4 kernels, that will really annoy people flipping
> from one kernel to the other.  If somebody would tell me about these
> things then I could fix them!  I even asked about 2.2 support for USB
> earlier in the week and got no replies.  Where is the 2.2 backport for
> USB?

It's in the 2.2.18 kernel proper now.  And there are updates in the
2.2.19-pre series.

But you are correct, there is no module table support yet.

If I do get hotplug support working in 2.2.x with the modtables stuff, I
will use the same format that 2.4.x has, so no change will be needed for
modutils (you will not have to switch modutils between kernel versions)
and you will not have to upgrade if you do not want to have the hotplug
stuff work as well as it could.

Also, I sent the following message both to you and the list last week
when you asked about USB hotplug support in 2.2.x:

--------------------------------------------------------

On Sun, Jan 21, 2001 at 05:16:58PM +1100, Keith Owens wrote:
> Some people have mentioned usb hotplug support on 2.2 kernels, as an
> add on patch.  Does it use depmod or does it use a separate hand built
> table?  If it uses depmod, what does struct usb_device_id look like?

I had talked about doing the backport patch if others thought it would
be a good idea, but hadn't gotten to it yet.  I don't know of any
existing patches that do this (if there are, could someone point me to
them?)

I was thinking of using depmod, but due to the latest "mess" with the
structures, I hadn't decided what the usb_device_id format would look
like.  I am leaning toward whatever 2.4.x looks like, to try to preserve
compatibility as much as I can.
 
I also was/am going to test the crap out of it with older versions of
modutils, so as not to require any upgrades if the user didn't want to
have hotplug support (one of the 2.2.x requirements).

Does that all sound ok?

thanks,

greg k-h

-- 
greg@(kroah|wirex).com

_______________________________________________
Linux-hotplug-devel mailing list  http://linux-hotplug.sourceforge.net
Linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-hotplug-devel