Yeah, but that's the easy part. What about the definition of show_trace? I did IPL the 2.4.24 kernel, and I was able to modprobe the qeth driver, bring up a QDIO eth0, and ping another guest. So, it _works_, but is it _correct?
Mark Post -----Original Message----- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Alex deVries Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 5:04 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Kernel 2.4.24 qeth.o - unresolved symdol show_trace How about: #if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_S390) || defined (CONFIG_ARCH_S390X) .. #endif ? (note the ||, not |) - Alex Post, Mark K wrote: >Well, it turns out this won't work as written (even if I fix the syntax >error in the #if statement.) :( There's so much I don't understand about >kernels it's not even funny. Sigh. > >Maybe someone from Boeblingen can help out here? This is a start: >#if (defined(CONFIG_ARCH_S390) | (CONFIG_ARCH_S390X)) >EXPORT_SYMBOL(show_trace); >#endif > >but, it also requires that the show_trace routine defintion be included >somehow. Unfortunately, the routine is declared in >./arch/s390/kernel/traps.c, and not in a header file, which is how most of >the other symbols are covered. Changing the mod to: >#if (defined(CONFIG_ARCH_S390) | (CONFIG_ARCH_S390X)) >extern void show_trace; >EXPORT_SYMBOL(show_trace); >#endif > >works, but is it the correct thing to do? So many questions, so few @#$% >answers. > > >Mark Post > >-----Original Message----- >From: Post, Mark K >Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 1:47 PM >To: 'Linux on 390 Port' >Subject: RE: Kernel 2.4.24 qeth.o - unresolved symdol show_trace > > >You can try inserting this into linux/kernel/ksyms.c: >EXPORT_SYMBOL(show_trace); > >Or, if you want to be more rigorous about it: >#if defined (CONFIG_ARCH_S390 || CONFIG_ARCH_S390X) >EXPORT_SYMBOL(show_trace); >#endif > >It might make your problem go away. > >Mark Post > >-----Original Message----- >From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of >Kasza Karoly >Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 2:40 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Kernel 2.4.24 qeth.o - unresolved symdol show_trace > > >Hi all. > >Im trying to compile kernel 2.4.24 for z800 in 31bit more. >Currently i have applied ibm june 2003 experimental >patches (i know they are for 2.4.23, but - as mentioned on >this list - they patch 2.4.24 also perfectly), and >a patch for devfs from some ibm folk (i dont remember his name, >i found the patch somewhere in google in a mailing list (maybe >on this?)). >Now the kernel and the modules compile, but qeth.o - which >is the most important module, we can say that i think - says >that he got an unresolved symbol: show_trace. If i am correct, >this issue has been fixed in somewhere 2.5.73, but i didn't >find that is has been fixed back in 2.4. >Now does anybody knows anything about this unresolved symdol thingie, >or will i have to backport the bugfix from 2.5.73 to 2.4.24? >Thank you for any help. > >Kasza Karoly > >P.S.: it is kind of weird that a factory kernel cannot be compiled >on the 390 architecture, and one have to collect patches and fixes >from all over the net, dont you think? > > >
