Subject: Re: LKM kernel version mismatch
To: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
From: Andrew Brown <>
List: current-users
Date: 12/01/2003 08:38:42
>  | it installs a syscall that ignores all its arguments,
>  | does nothing else, and then returns.  all so that i have one.  it,
>  | therefore, *CANNOT* fail to match any api in the kernel, because it
>  | doesn't use any.
>Hmm?   Isn't there an API in the kernel being used to install a new syscall?

um...yeah, though i would expect that if *that* changed, the version
of the lkm interface would refuse to load *any* module, not just those
that are three days too old...

that's fine.

>While I don't much believe in LKMs for available source systems, I do
>however understand what you're requesting I think - that is, a more finely
>grained way to tell just what API may have altered, so LKMs could
>determine whether they will still work, or need to be recompiled.  The
>current "nothing has changed" (which is often a lie anyway), or "anything
>might have changed" is a little crude.

maybe something like that, yes.

|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|             * "ah!  i see you have the internet (Andrew Brown)                that goes *ping*!"       * "information is power -- share the wealth."