From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Erdfelt Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 19:53:41 +0000 Subject: Re: [Linux-ia64] modutils 2.4.2 and USB Message-Id: List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 12, 2001, Michael Madore wrote: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 11:41:13AM -0800, Johannes Erdfelt wrote: > > That is definately weird. Keith Owens wanted to add a version information > > to help fix a problem we ran into with 2.4.0. > > > > Right before 2.4.0 we had to modify the usb_device_id structure to add some > > extra information to make it work correctly. However, this didn't change > > the size of the structure (because of alignment reasons) and as a result > > it was difficult for modutils to tell the difference between the old style > > structure and the new style structure. > > > > Both Linus and I didn't want to add the version information in 2.4 and we > > just told him to drop the support for the old style structure since it was > > only found in development kernels. > > > > The code stayed in modutils it appears since it wouldn't get in the way > > of anything and it would be used in 2.5. > > > > But, the patch never went into the kernel and it shouldn't be finding any > > version information. Is there a __module_usb_device_ver symbol in acm.o? > > Yes, acm.o has a symbol called __module_usb_device_ver. If I temporarily > remove acm.o, I get the same message for audio.o, so it isn't a problem just > with that module. Exactly which patches did you apply? My ia64 development system only has the symbols which should be there. 0000000000000020 ? __module_author 0000000000000068 ? __module_description 0000000000000000 ? __module_kernel_version 0000000000000000 g __module_usb_device_size 0000000000000008 g __module_usb_device_table U __this_module JE