Re: CONFIG_SMP patch available for 2.1.54

David Woodhouse (D.W.Woodhouse@nortel.co.uk)
Thu, 11 Sep 1997 11:04:42 +0100


mec@shout.net said:
> Janos Farkas wrote:

> > There should probably be a way to move the module versioning into
> the link stage. In the worst case, it would then cause relinking all
> modules (or "re-hinting" them with versions), it looks much more
> reasonable than recompiling most of the kernel because of a dummy
> change in an essential file.

> I think so too. I've tried to design a system without .ver files and
> I can't quite get it to work.

What about keeping versions separately in the kernel's symbol table? So it's
keeping tuples of (address, name, version) rather than (address,
name_Rversion)?

Then the only object file that gets changed when the version of a label is
changed is the one which holds its entry in the symtab. One fairly simple
modification to the modutils and to the syscall, and we have it.

-- 
David Woodhouse,	CB3 9AN		http://dwmw2.robinson.cam.ac.uk/
	dwmw2@cam.ac.uk 		 Tel: 0976 658355        
	D.W.Woodhouse@nortel.co.uk	 Tel: 01279 402332