From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932110AbVKJU62 (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2005 15:58:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751229AbVKJU62 (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2005 15:58:28 -0500 Received: from pfepa.post.tele.dk ([195.41.46.235]:26244 "EHLO pfepa.post.tele.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750757AbVKJU61 (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2005 15:58:27 -0500 Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 21:59:31 +0100 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Jan Beulich Cc: Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/39] NLKD - early/late CPU up/down notification Message-ID: <20051110205931.GC7584@mars.ravnborg.org> References: <43720DAE.76F0.0078.0@novell.com> <43720E2E.76F0.0078.0@novell.com> <43720E72.76F0.0078.0@novell.com> <43720EAF.76F0.0078.0@novell.com> <20051109164544.GB32068@kroah.com> <43723B57.76F0.0078.0@novell.com> <20051109171919.GA32761@kroah.com> <437307BC.76F0.0078.0@novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <437307BC.76F0.0078.0@novell.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I understand that. But you don't see my point, so I'll try to explain > the background: When discovering the reason for the kallsyms change > (also posted with the other NLKD patches) not functioning with > CONFIG_MODVERSIONS and binutils between 2.16.90 and 2.16.91.0.3 I > realized that the warning messages from the modpost build stage are very > easy to overlook (in fact, all reporters of the problem overlooked them > as well as I did on the first build attempting to reproduce the > problem). This basically means these messages are almost useless, and > detection of the problem will likely be deferred to the first attempt to > load an offending module (which, as in the case named, may lead to an > unusable kernel). Hence, at least until this build problem gets > addressed I continue to believe that adding the preprocessor conditional > is the better way of dealing with potential issues. Can you elaborate a little what you like to have done to the build process. Sam