RE: [Dri-devel] Re: 2.4.22-rc2 unresolved symbols in drm/sis.o wh en CONFIG_AGP=m

RE: [Dri-devel] Re: 2.4.22-rc2 unresolved symbols in drm/sis.o wh en CONFIG_AGP=m

[Alexander Stohr]

why wont the module compilation still pass
when SIS fb configuration flags from the
Linux kernel configuration are missing?

sorry if that requirement is already
mentioned in the readme. i am just wondering.

-Alex.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Cox [mailto:alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk]
> Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2003 17:48
> To: Filip Sneppe
> Cc: faith@valinux.com; DRI Devel; Linux Kernel Mailing List
> Subject: [Dri-devel] Re: 2.4.22-rc2 unresolved symbols in 
> drm/sis.o when
> CONFIG_AGP=m
> 
> 
> On Sul, 2003-08-17 at 16:39, Filip Sneppe wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I get this on Debian Sarge at the end of a "make modules_install":
> > 
> > depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
> > /lib/modules/2.4.22-rc2/kernel/drivers/char/drm/sis.o
> > depmod:         sis_malloc_Ra3329ed5
> > depmod:         sis_free_Rced25333
> 
> SIS DRM requires SIS frame buffer, known problem
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including
> Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now.
> Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET.
> http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet
_072303_01/01
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel

RE: [Dri-devel] Re: 2.4.22-rc2 unresolved symbols in drm/sis.o wh en CONFIG_AGP=m

[Eric Anholt]

On Sun, 2003-08-17 at 09:12, Alexander Stohr wrote:
> why wont the module compilation still pass
> when SIS fb configuration flags from the
> Linux kernel configuration are missing?
> 
> sorry if that requirement is already
> mentioned in the readme. i am just wondering.

The SiS DRM uses sisfb to allocate the framebuffer memory (XFree86 uses
sisfb, too, when present).  There is currently no fallback method for
when sisfb is not present.  I am working at the moment on removing this
requirement.  We could have ifdeffed appropriately and built a
non-functional module, but that wasn't done.

I hope nobody minds me making massive style changes on the sis DRM
code.  I find it quite ugly at the moment.

-- 
Eric Anholt                                eta@lclark.edu          
http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/         anholt@FreeBSD.org