lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Apr]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 3.13: <module> disagrees about version of symbol <symbol>
Am 08.04.2014 14:14, schrieb Matt Fleming:
> On Tue, 08 Apr, at 06:46:49AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>> Fleming, Matt wrote:
>>> On 7 April 2014 21:42, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This sounds like the UEFI boot corrupts some memory?
>>>
>>> Hmpf, yeah. I'll take a look in the morning.
>>>
>>> Thomas, you mention you're running in a 32-bit vm earlier in this
>>> thread. Any chance you're using ovmf because that would make it much
>>> easier to track this down?
>>>
>>
>> I'm not familiar with UEFI boot, but it could happen because what
>> I experienced with BIOS boot was an address dependent behavior.
>>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/4/188
>
> OK, that's a pretty good clue, thanks Tetsuo.
>
> Thomas, could you try this patch? It seems the use of code32_start in
> the EFI boot stub was totally wrong for the case where the boot stub
> relocates the kernel - you're likely to hit this path if using the EFI
> boot stub directly from the EFI shell or gummiboot.
>
> It was pointing at the start of the kernel image and not the protected
> mode code.

Hello Matt,

I am unable to backport this to 3.14 for lack of assembler magic. While
I can test this with git master, I eventually still need a version that
is backported to 3.14. Any chance you could provide that, too?


[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-04-08 21:21    [W:0.073 / U:2.524 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site