Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 2 Dec 1999 11:57:29 -0500 | From | "Jim Nance" <> | Subject | Portable binary modules |
| |
On Thu, Dec 02, 1999 at 02:44:47PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> Note btw its not enough to specify if its been tested with 2.2.5 or 2.2.12 > you also have to specify if it is egcs or gcc built. for 1 or 2gig memory > option and/or for SMP
Yuck. I did not realize it was this bad. I knew about the SMP dependency, but not the others.
Something I have wondered about for a while is how difficult would it be to make SMP modules run in a non-SMP kernel. Is it as easy as having the UP kernels provide dummy locking functions which always say they aquired a lock but dont really try?
Thanks,
Jim
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |