From: LGW <large@lilymarleen.de>
To: root@chaos.analogic.com
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: porting driver to 2.6, still unknown relocs... :(
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 19:33:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F4CEB65.2080509@lilymarleen.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.53.0308271319350.2174@chaos>
Richard B. Johnson wrote:
>On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>
>
>
>>On 27 Aug 2003 16:59:38 +0100
>>Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>On Mer, 2003-08-27 at 16:34, LGW wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>The driver is mostly a wrapper around a generic driver released by the
>>>>manufacturer, and that's written in C++. But it worked like this for the
>>>>2.4.x kernel series, so I think it has something todo with the new
>>>>module loader code. Possibly ld misses something when linking the object
>>>>specific stuff like constructors?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>The new module loader is kernel side, it may well not know some of the
>>>C++ specific relocation types.
>>>
>>>
>>You did something that was explicitly not supported on 2.4 and it worked,
>>it broke on 2.6.
>>
>>The fact that it worked it all on 2.4 was a fluke.
>>
>>It's time to breakdown, do the right thing and figure out how to rewrite/translate the
>>C++ code to C.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>You did something that was explicitly not supported on 2.4 and it worked,
>>
>>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^_______ Yes!
>
>There was lots of discussion/flames back-and-forth with newbies
>requiring that modules be written in C++. This is what you get.
>Some of the C++ built-ins are not even global so the linker
>won't be able to find them if they are used. It's not just
>a matter of emulating 'new'. Parameter-passing 'by reference' also
>won't work so putting 'C' wrappers around stuff like they do
>in Dr. Jobbs and C/C++ Journal isn't going to work inside
>the kernel where there is no support.
>
>
I absolutly agree with your opinion here. But due to the fact that the
driver sources from the manufacturer where c++, a wrapper was easier
(and the license of the driver is... restrictive I'm afraid...). But a
rewrite in C is only a matter of time!
anyway, I have sound again, that's enough for the next few weeks I think.
regards,
Lars
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-27 17:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-27 13:38 porting driver to 2.6, still unknown relocs... :( LGW
2003-08-27 15:13 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-08-27 15:34 ` LGW
2003-08-27 15:50 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-08-27 15:59 ` Alan Cox
2003-08-27 16:15 ` LGW
2003-08-27 16:29 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-08-27 17:25 ` porting driver to 2.6, partly solved LGW
2003-08-27 17:07 ` porting driver to 2.6, still unknown relocs... :( Stephen Hemminger
2003-08-27 17:23 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-08-27 17:33 ` LGW [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3F4CEB65.2080509@lilymarleen.de \
--to=large@lilymarleen.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=root@chaos.analogic.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox