Subject: Re: Any resolution for LKM issues?
To: Greywolf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: gabriel rosenkoetter <email@example.com>
Date: 03/16/2001 13:40:18
On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 10:34:41AM -0800, Greywolf wrote:
> Actually, doesn't that mean that you just change the definition of the
> text (-T) address, like the kernel makefile does, or am I just showing my
> lack of knowledge on this subject? :-)
> I mean, couldn't you build the LKM and pass it -Ttext e0000000 or some
> such? It doesn't strike me that the toolchain itself needs to be changed
> for that.
> ...or is this the 26 vs. 32 bit issue remarked earlier?
26 bit, 32 MB.
That doesn't fix much, since the LKM still can't call functions that
reside in the kernel's memory space.
The point is that it IS getting mapped at 0xE0000000 (and it should
be), but that that's out of range of the location of the functions
it needs access to (say, uh, memcpy()).
~ g r @ eclipsed.net