> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris J Arges [mailto:chris.j.ar...@canonical.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 6:35 PM > To: Allan, Bruce W; Fujinaka, Todd > Cc: e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] [PATCH] Issues with compiling ixgbevf-2.15.3 on > Ubuntu 3.13.0-30 > > <snip> > >>> > >>> I'm not running Ubuntu, I'm looking at the 3.16.4-based kernel > >>> source in our local LXR database reportedly from the Ubuntu > >>> 14.10 linux-source package. IIRC, I ran 'make modules_prepare' > >>> using the 14.10 kernel config file which is supposed to generate > >>> the appropriate header files necessary for compiling out-of-tree > >>> drivers, but the only thing in ./include/generated/utsrelease.h > >>> is: > >>> > >>> #define UTS_RELEASE "3.16.4" > >>> > >>> How is it the stuff in /usr/src/linux-headers-`uname > >>> -r`/include/generated/utsrelease.h is different? Is it > >>> generated from a different config file or build scripts? > >>> > >> > >> Sorry for the confusion. Yes, this particular identifier is > >> generated in the Ubuntu distro linux packaging. > > > > So, are you saying the identifier will be found in a distro release > > package (like a "linux-headers" package or something similar) but > > *not* found in the Ubuntu linux-source-x.y.z package even after doing > > some level of processing of the source in that package? If that is > > the case, we will have to also load the Ubuntu linux-headers-x.y.z-n > > package into our LXR database if we want to be able to find the > > identifier to make Ubuntu-specific changes to our driver code. > > > > It's actually generated by the Linux Debian source packaging (for > example in Ubuntu Trusty 3.13 kernel: > http://zinc.ubuntu.com/git?p=ubuntu/ubuntu- > trusty.git;a=blob;f=debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk;hb=HEAD > > This generates the file that eventually is packaged in the built > linux-headers* Debian package. So, if you install something like > 'linux-headers-`uname -r`', this will contain the generated file. > > This all being said, the original patch I submitted actually _doesn't_ > use UTS_UBUNTU_RELEASE. It greps for the affected function names and > defines a macro in order to ifdef the appropriate C code. So it should > work without having to update any database. Let me know if that patch is > acceptable. > > Thanks, > --chris j arges
I'll leave it up to the folks here at Intel who own/work on the ixgbevf driver to decide what to do with your patch. I am more interested in, going forward, how to properly code for Ubuntu-specific back-ports. Thanks, Bruce. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=164703151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
