On Tuesday 12 June 2007 06:15:54 Russ Allbery wrote: > Mikael Gerdin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Package: openafs-modules-source > > Version: 1.4.4.dfsg1-3 > > > > openafs-modules-source fails to build with linux kernel 2.6.22-rc4 (and > > earlier) due to renaming of member thread_info in struct task_struct and > > changing the number of arguments to posix_lock_file from 2 to 3. There > > may be other changes as well, but I haven't found them. There is a bug > > open on openafs: http://rt.central.org/rt/index.html?q=61767 but the > > patch supplied is for the cvs version of openafs and does not fix the > > latest Debian version. The kernel headers I've tried to build against > > is linux-headers-2.6.22-6 version 2.6.22-6.13 which currently is the > > most recent kernel for Ubuntu gutsy. > > I don't have a system with 2.6.22 available to test. Could you try the > following patch and let me know if it fixes the problem? (If you apply it > manually, you'll need to re-run regen.sh to update the configure scripts.) > > === ./acinclude.m4 > ================================================================== > --- ./acinclude.m4 (revision 2546) > +++ ./acinclude.m4 (local) > @@ -611,6 +611,7 @@ > LINUX_FS_STRUCT_FOP_HAS_FLOCK > LINUX_KERNEL_LINUX_SYSCALL_H > LINUX_KERNEL_LINUX_SEQ_FILE_H > + LINUX_KERNEL_POSIX_LOCK_FILE_WAIT_ARG > LINUX_KERNEL_SELINUX > LINUX_KERNEL_SOCK_CREATE > LINUX_KERNEL_PAGE_FOLLOW_LINK > @@ -626,6 +627,7 @@ > LINUX_SCHED_STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_EXIT_STATE > LINUX_SCHED_STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_TGID > LINUX_SCHED_STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_TODO > + LINUX_SCHED_STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_THREAD_INFO > LINUX_EXPORTS_TASKLIST_LOCK > LINUX_GET_SB_HAS_STRUCT_VFSMOUNT > LINUX_STATFS_TAKES_DENTRY > @@ -767,6 +769,9 @@ > if test "x$ac_cv_linux_func_recalc_sigpending_takes_void" = > "xyes"; > then AC_DEFINE(RECALC_SIGPENDING_TAKES_VOID, 1, [define if your > recalc_sigpending takes void]) fi > + if test "x$ac_cv_linux_kernel_posix_lock_file_wait_arg" = > "xyes" ; then > + AC_DEFINE(POSIX_LOCK_FILE_WAIT_ARG, 1, [define if your linux > kernel > uses 3 arguments for posix_lock_file]) + fi > if test "x$ac_cv_linux_kernel_is_selinux" = "xyes" ; then > AC_DEFINE(LINUX_KERNEL_IS_SELINUX, 1, [define if your linux > kernel > uses SELinux features]) fi > @@ -812,6 +817,9 @@ > if test "x$ac_cv_linux_sched_struct_task_struct_has_todo" = > "xyes"; > then AC_DEFINE(STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_TODO, 1, [define if your struct > task_struct has todo]) fi > + if test > "x$ac_cv_linux_sched_struct_task_struct_has_thread_info" = > "xyes"; then + AC_DEFINE(STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_THREAD_INFO, > 1, [define > if your struct task_struct has thread_info]) + fi > if test "x$ac_cv_linux_get_sb_has_struct_vfsmount" = "xyes"; > then > AC_DEFINE(GET_SB_HAS_STRUCT_VFSMOUNT, 1, [define if your > get_sb_nodev > needs a struct vfsmount argument]) fi > === src/afs/LINUX/osi_sleep.c > ================================================================== > --- src/afs/LINUX/osi_sleep.c (revision 2546) > +++ src/afs/LINUX/osi_sleep.c (local) > @@ -205,9 +205,13 @@ > #if defined(STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_TODO) > !current->todo > #else > +#if defined(STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_THREAD_INFO) > test_ti_thread_flag(current->thread_info, TIF_FREEZE) > +#else > + test_ti_thread_flag(task_thread_info(current), TIF_FREEZE) > #endif > #endif > +#endif > ) > #ifdef LINUX_REFRIGERATOR_TAKES_PF_FREEZE > refrigerator(PF_FREEZE); > @@ -304,9 +308,13 @@ > #if defined(STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_TODO) > !current->todo > #else > +#if defined(STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_THREAD_INFO) > test_ti_thread_flag(current->thread_info, TIF_FREEZE) > +#else > + test_ti_thread_flag(task_thread_info(current), TIF_FREEZE) > #endif > #endif > +#endif > ) > #ifdef LINUX_REFRIGERATOR_TAKES_PF_FREEZE > refrigerator(PF_FREEZE); > === src/afs/LINUX/osi_vfsops.c > ================================================================== > --- src/afs/LINUX/osi_vfsops.c (revision 2546) > +++ src/afs/LINUX/osi_vfsops.c (local) > @@ -292,8 +292,10 @@ > { > struct vcache *vcp = (struct vcache *) foo; > > +#if defined(SLAB_CTOR_VERIFY) > if ((flags & (SLAB_CTOR_VERIFY|SLAB_CTOR_CONSTRUCTOR)) == > SLAB_CTOR_CONSTRUCTOR) > +#endif > inode_init_once(AFSTOV(vcp)); > } > > === src/afs/LINUX/osi_vnodeops.c > ================================================================== > --- src/afs/LINUX/osi_vnodeops.c (revision 2546) > +++ src/afs/LINUX/osi_vnodeops.c (local) > @@ -473,11 +473,11 @@ > #ifdef AFS_LINUX24_ENV > if ((code == 0 || flp->fl_type == F_UNLCK) && > (cmd == F_SETLK || cmd == F_SETLKW)) { > -#ifdef AFS_LINUX26_ENV > +#ifdef POSIX_LOCK_FILE_WAIT_ARG > + code = posix_lock_file(fp, flp, 0); > +#else > flp->fl_flags &=~ FL_SLEEP; > code = posix_lock_file(fp, flp); > -#else > - code = posix_lock_file(fp, flp, 0); > #endif > if (code && flp->fl_type != F_UNLCK) { > struct AFS_FLOCK flock2; > === src/cf/linux-test4.m4 > ================================================================== > --- src/cf/linux-test4.m4 (revision 2546) > +++ src/cf/linux-test4.m4 (local) > @@ -444,6 +444,18 @@ > AC_MSG_RESULT($ac_cv_linux_sched_struct_task_struct_has_exit_state)]) > > > +AC_DEFUN([LINUX_SCHED_STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_THREAD_INFO], [ > + AC_MSG_CHECKING([for thread_info in struct task_struct]) > + AC_CACHE_VAL([ac_cv_linux_sched_struct_task_struct_has_thread_info], [ > + AC_TRY_KBUILD( > +[#include <linux/sched.h>], > +[struct task_struct _tsk; > +printk("%d\n", _tsk.thread_info);], > + ac_cv_linux_sched_struct_task_struct_has_thread_info=yes, > + ac_cv_linux_sched_struct_task_struct_has_thread_info=no)]) > + AC_MSG_RESULT($ac_cv_linux_sched_struct_task_struct_has_thread_info)]) > + > + > AC_DEFUN([LINUX_FS_STRUCT_SUPER_HAS_ALLOC_INODE], [ > AC_MSG_CHECKING([for alloc_inode in struct super_operations]) > AC_CACHE_VAL([ac_cv_linux_fs_struct_super_has_alloc_inode], [ > @@ -456,6 +468,17 @@ > AC_MSG_RESULT($ac_cv_linux_fs_struct_super_has_alloc_inode)]) > > > +AC_DEFUN([LINUX_KERNEL_POSIX_LOCK_FILE_WAIT_ARG], [ > + AC_MSG_CHECKING([for 3rd argument in posix_lock_file found in new > kernels]) + AC_CACHE_VAL([ac_cv_linux_kernel_posix_lock_file_wait_arg], [ > + AC_TRY_KBUILD( > +[#include <linux/fs.h>], > +[posix_lock_file(0,0,0);], > + ac_cv_linux_kernel_posix_lock_file_wait_arg=yes, > + ac_cv_linux_kernel_posix_lock_file_wait_arg=no)]) > + AC_MSG_RESULT($ac_cv_linux_kernel_posix_lock_file_wait_arg)]) > + > + > AC_DEFUN([LINUX_KERNEL_SOCK_CREATE], [ > AC_MSG_CHECKING([for 5th argument in sock_create found in some SELinux > kernels]) AC_CACHE_VAL([ac_cv_linux_kernel_sock_create_v], [ > === src/rx/LINUX/rx_kmutex.c > ================================================================== > --- src/rx/LINUX/rx_kmutex.c (revision 2546) > +++ src/rx/LINUX/rx_kmutex.c (local) > @@ -123,9 +123,13 @@ > #if defined(STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_TODO) > !current->todo > #else > +#if defined(STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_THREAD_INFO) > test_ti_thread_flag(current->thread_info, TIF_FREEZE) > +#else > + test_ti_thread_flag(task_thread_info(current), TIF_FREEZE) > #endif > #endif > +#endif > ) > #ifdef LINUX_REFRIGERATOR_TAKES_PF_FREEZE > refrigerator(PF_FREEZE); > === src/rx/LINUX/rx_knet.c > ================================================================== > --- src/rx/LINUX/rx_knet.c (revision 2546) > +++ src/rx/LINUX/rx_knet.c (local) > @@ -173,9 +173,13 @@ > #if defined(STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_TODO) > !current->todo > #else > +#if defined(STRUCT_TASK_STRUCT_HAS_THREAD_INFO) > test_ti_thread_flag(current->thread_info, TIF_FREEZE) > +#else > + test_ti_thread_flag(task_thread_info(current), TIF_FREEZE) > #endif > #endif > +#endif > ) > #ifdef LINUX_REFRIGERATOR_TAKES_PF_FREEZE > refrigerator(PF_FREEZE);
The patch fixed the problem, the build does not fail and the module works as far as i can tell. Very nice. Unfortunately I can't test it on any other arch, so I can only say that it works on i386. There are two other places where thread_info is accessed, in src/afs/afs_pioctl.c:281 and src/afs/afs_call.c:1330 but they seem to apply only on a PPC64-arch, I don't know if these need to be modified as well. // Mikael Gerdin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
