Op woensdag 20 maart 2013 21:20:14 schreef AL13N: > Op woensdag 20 maart 2013 15:50:06 schreef Frank Griffin: > > On 03/20/2013 01:33 PM, Thierry Vignaud wrote: > > > That's because modules.alias enables to match through wildchars. > > > > > > eg for ehci (see either /sbin/modinfo ehci_pci or > > > "fgrep ehci /lib/modules/3.8.3-desktop-2.mga3/modules.alias"): > > > > > > alias pci:v0000104Ad0000CC00sv*sd*bc*sc*i* ehci_pci > > > alias pci:v*d*sv*sd*bc0Csc03i20* ehci_pci > > > > > > That means that ehci matches both: > > > - 0x104A 0xCC00 (probably a device that reports a broken/bogus class) > > > - any PCI device whose class is PCI_CLASS_SERIAL_USB_EHCI > > > > > > Note that for this one: > > > - lsmod reports ehci_pci > > > - modinfo reports the real fs path: ehci-pci > > > - lspci -vvk reports: ehci-pci > > > > I understand. It is the kernel itself (and associated tools) that mix > > and match underscore and dash. Hence the need for a conversion patch. > > not really, it just means that in the kernel - are mapped to _; modprobe > tools handle both cases, just modinfo reports the filename which can > include '-', but it can still handle both. > > lspci and most tools just report it as it's really named (depending on > filename). modules.dep and modules.descr, etc... has the name as it is as > well, meaning there can be '-' in the name. > > i just see this workaround being effective to handle lstdetect, which > somehow forces all of it being lowercase... > > i don't know how much of lstdetect is hardcoded and how much of it is > generated, but imho the cleanest way would be to fix lstdetect, so that it > gives the proper module names... > > i've been looking at a way to fix the module list window for choosing, but > the problem isn't as simple as i thought, since insmod looks at > filenames... which is another workaround. > > @thierry: i donno what you think of it, but imo: > A) fixing lstdetect would be the cleanest way (maybe not the simplest) > B) perhaps in the comparing i can workaround this, but the compare code will > not be as simple as it should...
forgot to mention option C: C) using kmod in stage1 but option C might not be as easy and will increase the stage1 size; and raises the question if stage2 is actually still needed then...?
