On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 03:28:24PM -0700, Joe Stringer wrote: >> On 14 October 2015 at 15:21, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 04:35:32PM -0700, Saurabh Mohan wrote: >> >> On Ubuntu depmod's search priority is configured in /etc/depmod to be >> >> updates and then the kernel built-in directory. >> >> $ cat /etc/depmod.d/ubuntu.conf >> >> search updates ubuntu built-in >> >> >> >> Thus change the placement of openvswitch.ko under updates/ not >> >> kernel/updates. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Saurabh Mohan <[email protected]> >> > >> > This appears to be correct, but I'm confused about how this could have >> > not been noticed for years. Did something change recently? >> >> We recently changed it from kernel/ to kernel/updates (prior to v2.4 >> release), and the commit message suggests it was previously >> nondeterministic: >> >> commit b519432205c36bda5c7331f77a49eaaa919967ad >> Author: Ansis Atteka <[email protected]> >> Date: Tue May 26 16:49:49 2015 -0700 >> >> debian: install openvswitch kernel module under "updates" directory >> >> This patch fixes a bug where "modprobe openvswitch" command on Ubuntu >> distribution would have sometimes tried to load OVS kernel module that >> shipped together with Linux Kernel, even though one had also installed >> OVS datapath debian package created with module-assistant. Because of >> this issue force-reload-kmod command occasionally malfunctioned and >> failed to load the right kernel module. >> >> This bug happened *occasionally* because the default Ubuntu depmod >> configuration in /etc/depmod.d/ubuntu.conf is set to look for kernel >> modules first in "updates" directory, then in "ubuntu" directory and >> then in other directories. If there were two openvswitch.ko modules >> in "other directories", then modprobe would have loaded kernel >> module that was nondeterministically listed first by file system. > > OK, I understand why it was nondeterministic before, but where does > kernel/updates come in then, since it seems to be different from and not > as high-priority as "updates"? Does anyone know?
I am still trying to find the answer in my email history why I ended up using "kernel/updates" over "updates". Saurabh, did you encounter an issue where the wrong kernel module was loaded or is this to achieve conformance? > > Thanks, > > Ben. > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
