lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [2.6.29.x+ FIX] CONFIG_FILE_LOCKING should not depend on CONFIG_BLOCK
> > Fix: CONFIG_FILE_LOCKING should not depend on CONFIG_BLOCK.
> > Patch against 2.6.29.*, 2.6.30, current.
> >
> > inlined please find a trivial fix that makes it possible to run
> > complete systems out of an initramfs on current kernels again
> > (this last worked on 2.6.27.*).
>
> Please describe the problem more completely. Why is it not possible?
> What goes wrong? Your initramfs kernel has CONFIG_BLOCK=n?

Precisely. Without this patch and with CONFIG_BLOCK unset, CONFIG_FILE_LOCKING
is forced to "n", which makes it impossible to run things as elementary as "mount",
they'll all fail with "flock(): not implemented" and similar.

I believe this is an apparent inconsistency between real code dependencies
(locks.o does not need the block layer compiled to successfully link) and
config symbol dependencies.

> Also, please do include a Signed-off-by: with each patch - see
> Documentation/SubmittingPatches for a description.

Ah, sorry, I haven't submitted a patch in years.

--
Tomáš Szépe <szepe@pinerecords.com>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-16 00:01    [W:0.050 / U:0.312 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site