2.5.51 don't compil with dvb

2.5.51 don't compil with dvb

[Gregoire Favre]

Hello,

I got:

   ld -m elf_i386  -r -o init/built-in.o init/main.o init/version.o init/do_mounts.o init/initramfs.o
  	ld -m elf_i386 -e stext -T arch/i386/vmlinux.lds.s arch/i386/kernel/head.o arch/i386/kernel/init_task.o  init/built-in.o --start-group  usr/built-in.o  arch/i386/kernel/built-in.o  arch/i386/mm/built-in.o  arch/i386/mach-generic/built-in.o  kernel/built-in.o  mm/built-in.o  fs/built-in.o  ipc/built-in.o  security/built-in.o  crypto/built-in.o  lib/lib.a  arch/i386/lib/lib.a  drivers/built-in.o  sound/built-in.o  arch/i386/pci/built-in.o  net/built-in.o --end-group  -o vmlinux
drivers/built-in.o(.text+0x38655): In function `try_attach_device':
: undefined reference to `MOD_CAN_QUERY'
make: *** [vmlinux] Error 1

And in the src:

rgrep -r -l try_attach_device * gives:

drivers/media/dvb/built-in.o
drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dvb-core.o
drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dvb_i2c.c
drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dvb_i2c.o
drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/built-in.o
drivers/media/built-in.o
drivers/built-in.o

That's with the original 2.5.51 and with the CVS from yesterday evening
I got exactly the same...

>From my .config:

CONFIG_DVB=y
CONFIG_DVB_CORE=y
CONFIG_DVB_DEVFS_ONLY=y
CONFIG_DVB_ALPS_BSRV2=m
CONFIG_DVB_AV7110=m
CONFIG_DVB_AV7110_OSD=y

Thank you very much,

	Grégoire
________________________________________________________________
http://ulima.unil.ch/greg ICQ:16624071 mailto:greg@ulima.unil.ch

Re: 2.5.51 don't compil with dvb

[Alan Cox]

On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 15:07, Gregoire Favre wrote:
> drivers/built-in.o(.text+0x38655): In function `try_attach_device':
> : undefined reference to `MOD_CAN_QUERY'
> make: *** [vmlinux] Error 1
> 

Modules are still very broken in 2.5.51, its best to compile a system
which doesn't use modules or stay at an older kernel

Re: 2.5.51 don't compil with dvb

[Rusty Russell]

On 10 Dec 2002 16:05:15 +0000
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:

> On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 15:07, Gregoire Favre wrote:
> > drivers/built-in.o(.text+0x38655): In function `try_attach_device':
> > : undefined reference to `MOD_CAN_QUERY'
> > make: *** [vmlinux] Error 1
> > 
> 
> Modules are still very broken in 2.5.51, its best to compile a system
> which doesn't use modules or stay at an older kernel

That may be true, but in this case, it's the only occurrance of MOD_CAN_QUERY
outside the archs which haven't been updated to the new module loader yet,
and it's a very odd thing to do.

I assume the author meant this:

diff -urpN --exclude TAGS -X /home/rusty/devel/kernel/kernel-patches/current-dontdiff --minimal linux-2.5.51/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dvb_i2c.c working-2.5.51-dvb/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dvb_i2c.c
--- linux-2.5.51/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dvb_i2c.c	2002-11-28 10:20:07.000000000 +1100
+++ working-2.5.51-dvb/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dvb_i2c.c	2002-12-11 10:53:09.000000000 +1100
@@ -64,10 +64,8 @@ static
 void try_attach_device (struct dvb_i2c_bus *i2c, struct dvb_i2c_device *dev)
 {
 	if (dev->owner) {
-		if (!MOD_CAN_QUERY(dev->owner))
+		if (!try_inc_mod_count(dev->owner))
 			return;
-
-		__MOD_INC_USE_COUNT(dev->owner);
 	}
 
 	if (dev->attach (i2c) == 0) {


-- 
   there are those who do and those who hang on and you don't see too
   many doers quoting their contemporaries.  -- Larry McVoy

Re: 2.5.51 don't compil with dvb

[Alan Cox]

On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 23:53, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On 10 Dec 2002 16:05:15 +0000
> Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 15:07, Gregoire Favre wrote:
> > > drivers/built-in.o(.text+0x38655): In function `try_attach_device':
> > > : undefined reference to `MOD_CAN_QUERY'
> > > make: *** [vmlinux] Error 1
> > > 
> > 
> > Modules are still very broken in 2.5.51, its best to compile a system
> > which doesn't use modules or stay at an older kernel
> 
> That may be true, but in this case, it's the only occurrance of MOD_CAN_QUERY
> outside the archs which haven't been updated to the new module loader yet,
> and it's a very odd thing to do.
> 
> I assume the author meant this:

That looks right to me yes