Hi, I found the problem. It seems to be a problem with the insmod tool in the busybox that I am using on my target (0.61pre from cvs).
Matthias Matthias Fuchs wrote: > > Hi all, > > I got a little problem that I cannot really understand. > I wrote a little device driver for a 405 PPC board. The driver registers > a miscdevice. > > Normally all misc devices are listed under /proc/misc. > My first attempt resulted in a /proc/misc looking like this: > > # cat /proc/misc > 187 <- "test" is missing here ! > 185 gpio > > The code is attached. When I change the init stuff for the miscdevice > structure > a little bit (see below with WORKING defined), I got the expected bahavior. > > Is this a relocation problem when loading the module ? In the two > version the NAME string > sits in different segments. Is there a way to fix the problem by a > compiler switch ? Is this a PPC issue ? > I noticed that the Linux rtc driver uses the same code as I do, but it > does not have the problem. > The difference is that my code is a lkm and mot compiled into the kernel. > > Matthias > > ... > > #define NAME "test" > #define MINOR 187 > > #ifdef WORKING > static char name[]=NAME; > #endif > > static struct file_operations my_fops = > { > ... > }; > > static struct miscdevice my_miscdev = > { > #ifdef WORKING > name: name, // results in correct bahavior > #else > name: NAME, // results in missing module name in /proc/misc > #endif > minor: MINOR, > fops: &my_fops > }; > > int __init my_init(void) > { > misc_register(&my_miscdev); > return 0; > } > > > void __exit my_exit(void) > { > misc_deregister(&my_miscdev); > } > > module_init(my_init); > module_exit(my_exit); > > > > ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/