Re: question about building a module
Le samedi 08 décembre 2012 à 04:02 -0500, devendra.aaru a écrit : > On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Yann Droneaud wrote: > > cd net/bluetooth > > make -C $PWD/../../ M=$PWD modules > > > > (But if you change a configuration parameter in .config, > > you will need to do a full build) > > why? is that creates a linker errs while your module uses some symbols > that are not exported? > It's to create the autogenerated files built from .config. Especially include/generated/autoconf.h header. It's probably doable using only "make prepare" or "make modules_prepare". Regards. -- Yann Droneaud OPTEYA ___ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
Re: On loading userspace data into particular section of physical memory (ARM)
Hi Mulyadi, How are you doing? > PS: are you considering creating special data section? perhaps by > using custom ld script? Yes, that would be a possiblity. Regards, Joel ___ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
Re: Best and fastest way to understand kernel subsystem ?
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Shraddha Kamat wrote: > What is the best (and the fastest ) way to understand a kernel > subsystem ( for e.g., filesystem , Networking .. etc.) ever used UML (User Mode Linux)? Combine it with gdb and put breakpoints at the codes you wanna learn...and watch them live working... But still, it takes time...so, basically, you need a lot of time -- regards, Mulyadi Santosa Freelance Linux trainer and consultant blog: the-hydra.blogspot.com training: mulyaditraining.blogspot.com ___ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
Re: On loading userspace data into particular section of physical memory (ARM)
Hi Joel... On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Joel A Fernandes wrote: > I am looking at a problem that might be too difficult to solve, or > might not if I'm missing something so I thought I'd bounce it off this > group, > > Basically I have an application in userspace who's ".data" section > _has_ to be loaded into particular locations in physical memory. That > is, there is a chunk of physical memory that has to contain the .data > section and no other part of physical memory should. > > What is the easiest way to do this? I guess, changes might be required > to the ELF loaders in fs/bin*.c. Any other tricks? I somewhat agree that the solution would be changing some parts in ELF loader. But not sure which one, loader in kernel space, user space or both. PS: are you considering creating special data section? perhaps by using custom ld script? -- regards, Mulyadi Santosa Freelance Linux trainer and consultant blog: the-hydra.blogspot.com training: mulyaditraining.blogspot.com ___ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
Re: Speed Analysis Util.
On Sat, 08 Dec 2012, Gustavo da Silva wrote: > Hello Kernel Brothers!! How are you??? > > So, I would like test the performance of my notebook, developing one or two > utilities, and have a better > mensurement about the speed. > > But it can help all of us. > > 1st: I would like mensure the speed making a counter (exacly bogomips? may > be). Loop+counter during 1 tickrate. > 2nd: The most interesting: How many memory cells in ram can we > access during 1tickrate? How could we develop this?! > > Both utils may run in long mode (64bits). Well, in real mode too; so, we > can compare the speed in the two modes! > > Some one knows how to develop a very small program/routine about that?! > > For the 2nd situation, a simple idea wrote in codesnipet form (consider the > intention, not the sintax! there are bugs! I know. Intel syntax.) Obviously! ;-) > > dw the_counter_cell 0 > lea bx, the_counter_cell > xor bx,bx > label: > inc [bx]# Could not be so simple like this, because the address can > be cached. Right? > loop label # breaked by an interruption. Just to express the intention. > > How could we create a small code for the 2nd situation, tring to force the > processor to not use the cache? As Drepper says[0], use the movntq instruction on x86_64 to bypass the cache. Regards, Tobi [0] http://www.akkadia.org/drepper/cpumemory.pdf p. 47ff. ___ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
Re: Speed Analysis Util.
*mensure: measure!! Sorry about it and other typo. 2012/12/8 Gustavo da Silva > Hello Kernel Brothers!! How are you??? > > So, I would like test the performance of my notebook, developing one or > two utilities, and have a better > mensurement about the speed. > > But it can help all of us. > > 1st: I would like mensure the speed making a counter (exacly bogomips? may > be). Loop+counter during 1 tickrate. > 2nd: The most interesting: How many memory cells in ram can we > access during 1tickrate? How could we develop this?! > > Both utils may run in long mode (64bits). Well, in real mode too; so, we > can compare the speed in the two modes! > > Some one knows how to develop a very small program/routine about that?! > > For the 2nd situation, a simple idea wrote in codesnipet form (consider > the intention, not the sintax! there are bugs! I know. Intel syntax.) > > dw the_counter_cell 0 > lea bx, the_counter_cell > xor bx,bx > label: > inc [bx]# Could not be so simple like this, because the address can > be cached. Right? > loop label # breaked by an interruption. Just to express the intention. > > How could we create a small code for the 2nd situation, tring to force the > processor to not use the cache? > > Regards. > Peace out. > > -- > Atenciosamente, > > Gustavo da Silva > gustavodasi...@gmail.com > -- Atenciosamente, Gustavo da Silva gustavodasi...@gmail.com ___ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
Re: question about building a module
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Yann Droneaud wrote: > Le vendredi 07 décembre 2012 à 20:44 +0200, Kevin Wilson a écrit : >> Hi, >> >> >> I am adding some code of my own **only** under >> net/bluetooth in some file there. >> >> >> There is only exactly one module which is changed by my addition, >> This is net/bluetooth/bluetooth.ko >> >> >> Now, when I run 'make -j2 modules' it takes quite a time, even If I >> did one change in one line in a file under net/bluetooth. >> >> >> I assume that it has to do with stage 2 of the build, which says >> something about >> ... >> Building modules, stage 2. >> MODPOST 855 modules >> ... >> see below full log. >> >> >> Now my question is this: >> Is there a way to make things more efficent when building a module, on >> the >> assumption that I do not change anything anywhere >> except /net/bluetooth (in this case)? >> >> >> somehow telling the MODPOST that only one module is changes ? >> >> >> I remember I once saw (not sure) a suggestion to build only a >> specified moule like: >> make net/bluetooth >> But in this case the result is the same. >> > > cd net/bluetooth > make -C $PWD/../../ M=$PWD modules > > (But if you change a configuration parameter in .config, > you will need to do a full build) why? is that creates a linker errs while your module uses some symbols that are not exported? > > Regards. > > -- > Yann Droneaud > OPTEYA > > > > ___ > Kernelnewbies mailing list > Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org > http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies ___ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
Re: question about building a module
Le vendredi 07 décembre 2012 à 20:44 +0200, Kevin Wilson a écrit : > Hi, > > > I am adding some code of my own **only** under > net/bluetooth in some file there. > > > There is only exactly one module which is changed by my addition, > This is net/bluetooth/bluetooth.ko > > > Now, when I run 'make -j2 modules' it takes quite a time, even If I > did one change in one line in a file under net/bluetooth. > > > I assume that it has to do with stage 2 of the build, which says > something about > ... > Building modules, stage 2. > MODPOST 855 modules > ... > see below full log. > > > Now my question is this: > Is there a way to make things more efficent when building a module, on > the > assumption that I do not change anything anywhere > except /net/bluetooth (in this case)? > > > somehow telling the MODPOST that only one module is changes ? > > > I remember I once saw (not sure) a suggestion to build only a > specified moule like: > make net/bluetooth > But in this case the result is the same. > cd net/bluetooth make -C $PWD/../../ M=$PWD modules (But if you change a configuration parameter in .config, you will need to do a full build) Regards. -- Yann Droneaud OPTEYA ___ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
