On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:23:22PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 01:29:05PM -0700, dann frazier wrote:
> > Because this affects a significant number of symbols, it doesn't look
> > to me like a safe thing to ignore w/ the #ifdef __GENKSYMS__ trick, so
> > its looking like we need to increment the ABI for the stable kernels,
> > and perhaps the lenny kernel. Do others on the team have a different
> > opinion?
>
> You did not dig deep enough.
Well, I came up with the same patch you did...
> It is a change in the task_struct. As long
> as this struct is never allocated outside of the core kernel (doing so
> would be insane anyway), the following patch will do.
I suppose so; I just don't like the guesswork. But, there aren't any
in-tree examples of allocating task_struct outside of the core, so
I'll concede that its probably safe.
My 2.6.18 backport is a little more invasive - it includes a few
changes to struct unix_sock. It appears to be mostly an internal
structure as well, but it worries me more because we're not just
tacking on a new field to the end:
--- af_unix.orig 2008-11-14 16:09:04.000000000 -0700
+++ af_unix.h 2008-11-14 16:08:37.000000000 -0700
@@ -81,9 +81,11 @@
struct mutex readlock;
struct sock *peer;
struct sock *other;
- struct sock *gc_tree;
+ struct list_head link;
atomic_t inflight;
spinlock_t lock;
+ unsigned int gc_candidate : 1;
+ unsigned int gc_maybe_cycle : 1;
wait_queue_head_t peer_wait;
};
#define unix_sk(__sk) ((struct unix_sock *)__sk)
There's one example in 2.6.18 where this is allocated out of tree (in
selinux). I'll go ahead and commit what I've got in case you want
context for this hunk.
> | --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> | +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> | @@ -1288,8 +1288,6 @@ struct task_struct {
> | atomic_t fs_excl; /* holding fs exclusive resources */
> | struct rcu_head rcu;
> |
> | - struct list_head *scm_work_list;
> | -
> | /*
> | * cache last used pipe for splice
> | */
> | @@ -1305,6 +1303,10 @@ struct task_struct {
> | int latency_record_count;
> | struct latency_record latency_record[LT_SAVECOUNT];
> | #endif
> | +
> | +#ifndef __GENKSYMS__
> | + struct list_head *scm_work_list;
> | +#endif
> | };
> |
> | /*
>
> However, there is a second change: scm_*, four or so. This symbols are
> only used inside the core (by the unix and netlink socket support), so I
> would ignore that.
*nod*
--
dann frazier
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
