Cheers Uwe,
it is not needed. I downloaded the patched RPMS from netraverse today.
They work fine.
Thanks for your help.
On Wed, 2002-03-20 at 18:13, Uwe Reimann wrote:
> I applied the patches you mentioned below . One of the two patches from
> netraverse fails in two files (don't remember which patch failed and
> which files were affected). After analyzing the <filename>.c.rej-files,
> I made the supposed changes by hand. They should have added a
> include-statement (like the one in kernel/sched.c below).
>
> I could send a patched version of the netraverse-patches that apply
> cleanly to kernel-source-2.4.18-6mdk if you like.
>
> Regrard, Uwe
>
> trax wrote:
> > Just curious what patches you applied.
> > I tried patching the source of the 2.4.18-6mdk
> > with
> >
> > Kernel-Win4Lin3-2.4.18.patch
> > mki-adapter.patch
> > kernel-fix-mki.patch
> >
> > I see it also fails with kernel/sched.c.***************
> > *** 32,37 ****
> >
> > #include <asm/uaccess.h>
> > #include <asm/mmu_context.h>
> >
> > extern void timer_bh(void);
> > extern void tqueue_bh(void);
> > --- 32,40 ----
> >
> > #include <asm/uaccess.h>
> > #include <asm/mmu_context.h>
> > + #ifdef CONFIG_MKI
> > + #include <asm/mki.h>
> > + #endif
> >
> > extern void timer_bh(void);
> > extern void tqueue_bh(void);
> > ###########################################
> >
> > Trying to create a bzImage, produces the following ...
> >
> > sched.c: In function `schedule':
> > sched.c:668: warning: implicit declaration of function `CALL_MKI_HOOK'
> > sched.c:668: `MKI_HOOK_SWITCH_AWAY' undeclared (first use in this
> > function)
> > sched.c:668: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
> > sched.c:668: for each function it appears in.)
> > make[2]: *** [sched.o] Error 1
> > make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.18-6mdk-win4lin/kernel'
> > make[1]: *** [first_rule] Error 2
> > make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.18-6mdk-win4lin/kernel'
> > make: *** [_dir_kernel] Error 2
> >
> >
> > So did you add, or change anything else to get this to compile?
> > (no rush, I am running it on and old 2.4.16 kernel, but it would be nice
> > to use the supermount and other goodies that are in 8.2)
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 2002-03-18 at 22:34, Uwe Reimann wrote:
> >
> >>Hi Robert, hi list,
> >>
> >>I have a patch ready that makes the patches for win4lin compile and
> >>
> > run
> >
> >>under kernel-2.4.18-6mdk. I am not a kernel-hacker, therefore I don't
> >>know wether everything's done right, but, at least for me, it works.
> >>
> >>Apply the patch after applying the patches from netraverse.
> >>
> >>Regards, Uwe
> >>
> >>P.S.: I did send the patch before, but as I did not see the mail show
> >>
> > up
> >
> >>on the list, I resend it.
> >>
> >>Robert Shade wrote:
> >>
> >>>>Running 2.4.17.16mdk :
> >>>>- really use andrea vm_24.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>I assume that you mean that you are running win4lin successfully
> >>>
> > with this
> >
> >>>kernel? (with necessary patches of course) If you are, please send
> >>>
> > me the
> >
> >>>file mm/vmscan.c (for reasons I will explain below) from your source
> >>>
> > tree to
> >
> >>>see what is going on.
> >>>
> >>>Yeah, I did look through the mandrake cvs after I posted and saw
> >>>
> > that they've
> >
> >>>been using it since then. However looking at vm_24 it looks like
> >>>
> > the
> >
> >>>collision occurs with the win4lin patch as well.
> >>>
> >>>The problem occurs in the swap_out function in the file mm/vmscan.c,
> >>>
> > in the
> >
> >>>vanilla kernel the arguments to swap_out are:
> >>>
> >>> unsigned int priority, unsigned int gfp_mask, zone_t * classzone
> >>>
> >>>however, in the aa vm_* kernel patches he made the arguments to
> >>>
> > swap_out:
> >
> >>> zone_t * classzone
> >>>
> >>>The win4lin patch uses the priority and gfp_mask variables like so:
> >>>
> >>> CALL_MKI_HOOK(MKI_HOOK_SWAP, (void *)priority, (void
> >>>
> > *)gfp_mask);
> >
> >>>as far as I can see, any kernel with the aa VM will fail to accept
> >>>
> > any
> >
> >>>win4lin patches.
> >>>
> >>>This might be on the edge of the scope of this list, but hopefully
> >>>
> > the
> >
> >>>maintainer of the kernel rpm is listening.
> >>>
> >>>Thanks.
> >>>
> >>>Robert
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> > On Mon, 2002-03-18 at 22:34, Uwe Reimann wrote:
> >
> >>Hi Robert, hi list,
> >>
> >>I have a patch ready that makes the patches for win4lin compile and run
> >>under kernel-2.4.18-6mdk. I am not a kernel-hacker, therefore I don't
> >>know wether everything's done right, but, at least for me, it works.
> >>
> >>Apply the patch after applying the patches from netraverse.
> >>
> >>Regards, Uwe
> >>
> >>P.S.: I did send the patch before, but as I did not see the mail show up
> >>on the list, I resend it.
> >>
> >>Robert Shade wrote:
> >>
> >>>>Running 2.4.17.16mdk :
> >>>>- really use andrea vm_24.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>I assume that you mean that you are running win4lin successfully with this
> >>>kernel? (with necessary patches of course) If you are, please send me the
> >>>file mm/vmscan.c (for reasons I will explain below) from your source tree to
> >>>see what is going on.
> >>>
> >>>Yeah, I did look through the mandrake cvs after I posted and saw that they've
> >>>been using it since then. However looking at vm_24 it looks like the
> >>>collision occurs with the win4lin patch as well.
> >>>
> >>>The problem occurs in the swap_out function in the file mm/vmscan.c, in the
> >>>vanilla kernel the arguments to swap_out are:
> >>>
> >>> unsigned int priority, unsigned int gfp_mask, zone_t * classzone
> >>>
> >>>however, in the aa vm_* kernel patches he made the arguments to swap_out:
> >>>
> >>> zone_t * classzone
> >>>
> >>>The win4lin patch uses the priority and gfp_mask variables like so:
> >>>
> >>> CALL_MKI_HOOK(MKI_HOOK_SWAP, (void *)priority, (void *)gfp_mask);
> >>>
> >>>as far as I can see, any kernel with the aa VM will fail to accept any
> >>>win4lin patches.
> >>>
> >>>This might be on the edge of the scope of this list, but hopefully the
> >>>maintainer of the kernel rpm is listening.
> >>>
> >>>Thanks.
> >>>
> >>>Robert
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
