Re: 2.6.11-rc2-mm1: SuperIO scx200 breakage

[Evgeniy Polyakov]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 20:03:20 +0100
Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 10:19:29PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 19:29:26 +0100
> > Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 09:43:36PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 18:54:49 +0100
> > > > Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > It seems noone who reviewed the SuperIO patches noticed that there are 
> > > > > now two modules "scx200" in the kernel...
> > > > 
> > > > They are almost mutually exlusive(SuperIO contains more advanced), 
> > > > so I do not see any problem here.
> > > 
> > > The Kconfig files allow building both modular at the same time.
> > > 
> > > > Only one of them can be loaded in a time.
> > > 
> > > You are assuming the module support was in able to correctly handle two 
> > > modules with the same name...
> > > 
> > > > So what does exactly bother you?
> > > 
> > > if [ -r System.map ]; then /sbin/depmod -ae -F System.map  2.6.11-rc2-mm1; fi
> > > WARNING: /lib/modules/2.6.11-rc2-mm1/kernel/drivers/i2c/busses/scx200_i2c.ko needs unknown symbol scx200_gpio_base
> > > WARNING: /lib/modules/2.6.11-rc2-mm1/kernel/drivers/i2c/busses/scx200_i2c.ko needs unknown symbol scx200_gpio_configure
> > > WARNING: /lib/modules/2.6.11-rc2-mm1/kernel/drivers/i2c/busses/scx200_i2c.ko needs unknown symbol scx200_gpio_shadow
> > > WARNING: /lib/modules/2.6.11-rc2-mm1/kernel/drivers/char/scx200_gpio.ko needs unknown symbol scx200_gpio_base
> > > WARNING: /lib/modules/2.6.11-rc2-mm1/kernel/drivers/char/scx200_gpio.ko needs unknown symbol scx200_gpio_configure
> > > WARNING: /lib/modules/2.6.11-rc2-mm1/kernel/drivers/char/scx200_gpio.ko needs unknown symbol scx200_gpio_shadow
> > 
> > Sorry, I can not buy it.
> > Above symbols are defined in old scx200 driver, and I it is depmod
> > who tries to get them from superio.
> 
> More exactly, "make modules_install" does install only one of the two 
> drivers.
> 
> > I definitely sure that it must be solved on the other layers.
> >...
> 
> Two modules with the same name are simply a _very_ bad idea.
> 
> Even if they weren't allowed to be compiled at the same time, they 
> should be named differently or it will cause much confusion for 
> everyone (or don't you want to see from the output of "lsmod" which of 
> the two modules is loaded?).

I do not agree with you, Adrian, but I will not contend.
As I say, noone protects against the same program names and there are
mechnisms to differ modules by simply looking in lsmod output.
Noone can damage systrem by loading "wrong" module.

So I still do not see problems here.

As I say I will change superio scx200 name since it is easier than
flood about unmatched points of view.

I will send patch through Greg and Andrew later.

Thank you, Adrian, for your comments.
 
> cu
> Adrian
> 
> -- 
> 
>        "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
>         of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
>        "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
>                                        Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed


	Evgeniy Polyakov

Only failure makes us experts. -- Theo de Raadt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/