Re: shm_open doesn't work (fix maybe).
Hi, On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 11:46:20AM -0500, Tom Brusehaver (N-Sysdyne > Corporation) wrote: >> >> I have been chasing all around trying to find out why >> shm_open always returns ENOSYS. It is implemented >> in glibc-2.2.2, and seems the 2.4.3 kernel knows about >> shmfs. >> >> It seems the file linux/mm/shmem.c has: >> #define SHMEM_MAGIC 0x01021994 >> >> And the glibc-2.2.2/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/linux_fsinfo.h has: >> #define SHMFS_SUPER_MAGIC 0x02011994 >> >> Well, which is correct? > > Update your glibc, 2.2.3pre* matches 2.4.x kernel: > > 2001-03-03 Ulrich Drepper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/linux_fsinfo.h (SHMFS_SUPER_MAGIC): > Update for real 2.4 kernels. Yes, and I apologize to Ulrich that the changed number slipped through to the official kernel. My fault. Greetings Christoph - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: shm_open doesn't work (fix maybe).
Hi, On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 11:46:20AM -0500, Tom Brusehaver (N-Sysdyne Corporation) wrote: I have been chasing all around trying to find out why shm_open always returns ENOSYS. It is implemented in glibc-2.2.2, and seems the 2.4.3 kernel knows about shmfs. It seems the file linux/mm/shmem.c has: #define SHMEM_MAGIC 0x01021994 And the glibc-2.2.2/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/linux_fsinfo.h has: #define SHMFS_SUPER_MAGIC 0x02011994 Well, which is correct? Update your glibc, 2.2.3pre* matches 2.4.x kernel: 2001-03-03 Ulrich Drepper [EMAIL PROTECTED] * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/linux_fsinfo.h (SHMFS_SUPER_MAGIC): Update for real 2.4 kernels. Yes, and I apologize to Ulrich that the changed number slipped through to the official kernel. My fault. Greetings Christoph - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: shm_open doesn't work (fix maybe).
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 11:46:20AM -0500, Tom Brusehaver (N-Sysdyne Corporation) wrote: > > I have been chasing all around trying to find out why > shm_open always returns ENOSYS. It is implemented > in glibc-2.2.2, and seems the 2.4.3 kernel knows about > shmfs. > > It seems the file linux/mm/shmem.c has: > #define SHMEM_MAGIC 0x01021994 > > And the glibc-2.2.2/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/linux_fsinfo.h has: > #define SHMFS_SUPER_MAGIC 0x02011994 > > Well, which is correct? Update your glibc, 2.2.3pre* matches 2.4.x kernel: 2001-03-03 Ulrich Drepper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/linux_fsinfo.h (SHMFS_SUPER_MAGIC): Update for real 2.4 kernels. Jakub - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
shm_open doesn't work (fix maybe).
I have been chasing all around trying to find out why shm_open always returns ENOSYS. It is implemented in glibc-2.2.2, and seems the 2.4.3 kernel knows about shmfs. It seems the file linux/mm/shmem.c has: #define SHMEM_MAGIC 0x01021994 And the glibc-2.2.2/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/linux_fsinfo.h has: #define SHMFS_SUPER_MAGIC 0x02011994 Well, which is correct? Looking for (trouble?) the reason, I found a patch http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg16996.html where there seems to be a typo, the remove line is correct: -#define SHM_FS_MAGIC 0x02011994 but the insert line has the 0201 reversed: +#define SHMEM_MAGIC0x01021994 Has anyone else run into this? (It seems the documentation on shmfs is sparse, so I don't think too many folks are even messing with it). Initially I thought, hey simple, just fix the kernel source, and everyone will be happy. But, then I thought, ooof! code I build for someone without a patched kernel will surely break. So then I thought simple I'll fix glibc and statically link. Of course, then someone will fix this, and all my binaries will be broken. Help! what is the "right" fix. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
shm_open doesn't work (fix maybe).
I have been chasing all around trying to find out why shm_open always returns ENOSYS. It is implemented in glibc-2.2.2, and seems the 2.4.3 kernel knows about shmfs. It seems the file linux/mm/shmem.c has: #define SHMEM_MAGIC 0x01021994 And the glibc-2.2.2/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/linux_fsinfo.h has: #define SHMFS_SUPER_MAGIC 0x02011994 Well, which is correct? Looking for (trouble?) the reason, I found a patch http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg16996.html where there seems to be a typo, the remove line is correct: -#define SHM_FS_MAGIC 0x02011994 but the insert line has the 0201 reversed: +#define SHMEM_MAGIC0x01021994 Has anyone else run into this? (It seems the documentation on shmfs is sparse, so I don't think too many folks are even messing with it). Initially I thought, hey simple, just fix the kernel source, and everyone will be happy. But, then I thought, ooof! code I build for someone without a patched kernel will surely break. So then I thought simple I'll fix glibc and statically link. Of course, then someone will fix this, and all my binaries will be broken. Help! what is the right fix. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
