Re: SMP vs. UP modules

Keith Owens (kaos@ocs.com.au)
Wed, 26 Apr 2000 16:16:08 +1000

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Doug Ledford: "Re: Linux Jobs as of 2.3.99pre6-5"
Previous message: Oliver Xymoron: "Re: Linux spin_unlock debate (fwd)"
Maybe in reply to: Dunlap, Randy: "SMP vs. UP modules"

On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 15:44:17 -0700,
"Dunlap, Randy" <randy.dunlap@intel.com> wrote:
>Does CONFIG_MODVERSIONS help any with modules that are
>built for SMP vs. UP kernels?

Absolutely. You get symbols like xyz_Rsmp_0e9db287, 0e9db287 is the
CRC check on the symbol "type", smp indicates it was compiled for smp.
A module compiled for UP would want symbols xyz_R_0e9db287 and would
fail to load.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Doug Ledford: "Re: Linux Jobs as of 2.3.99pre6-5"
Previous message: Oliver Xymoron: "Re: Linux spin_unlock debate (fwd)"
Maybe in reply to: Dunlap, Randy: "SMP vs. UP modules"