On 2011-10-25 22:54 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:17:24PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:04:55PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 12:51:42PM -0400, Nick Bowler wrote:
> > > > This is not the case: lockdep works fine with staging modules.
> > >
> > > Yes, that was fixed a few kernel versions ago.
> > >
> > > Now you might want to update that fix for the TAINT_OOT_MODULE flag as
> > > well, if you feel it is needed.
> >
> > I'm assuming you mean this patch ?
> >
> > commit 7816c45bf13255157c00fb8aca86cb64d825e878
> > Author: Roland Vossen <rvos...@broadcom.com>
> > Date: Thu Apr 7 11:20:58 2011 +0200
> >
> > modules: Enabled dynamic debugging for staging modules
>
> Hm, this is the patch I was thinking about yes. But as you point out:
[...]
> Perhaps the lockdep thing is totally different. I don't know about that
> check.
Lockdep is disabled (for the whole system) by add_taint itself. The
relevant commit that fixes TAINT_CRAP appears to be this one (circa
2.6.30):
commit 574bbe782057fdf0490dc7dec906a2dc26363e20
Author: Frederic Weisbecker <fweis...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat Apr 11 03:17:18 2009 +0200
lockdep: continue lock debugging despite some taints
I didn't know about the dynamic debug problem. Is there more breakage
that we haven't found yet? Remind me why we're trying to cripple out
of tree module users?
Cheers,
--
Nick Bowler, Elliptic Technologies (http://www.elliptictech.com/)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111026130834.ga6...@elliptictech.com
