Re: Announcing the release of BLCR 0.6.0_beta1

From: Cedric Le Goater (clg_at_fr_dot_ibm_dot_com)
Date: Wed Jul 25 2007 - 09:01:42 PDT

  • Next message: Paul H. Hargrove: "Re: Announcing the release of BLCR 0.6.0_beta1"
    Cedric Le Goater wrote:
    >> Hmm, not 100% sure on that one.  There is code in
    >> cr_module/cr_module.c:cr_init_module() that compares the addresses of
    >> two symbols as probed from the at configure time against
    >> their addresses as resolved by the kernel's module linker/loader.  BLCR
    >> refuses to load the module if these don't match, since it will be making
    >> function calls to other addresses obtained in the same way (and we
    >> really don't want to invoke code at random addresses in kernel context).
    >> So, my best guess is that message means what it says, perhaps due to
    >> BLCR's autoconf machinery locating the wrong file.  You
    >> should try comparing the output of
    >>  $ grep register_chrdev /proc/kyms
    >> against that of
    >>  $ grep register_chrdev [MAPFILE]
    >> where [MAPFILE] is the file being used by BLCR (try "grep
    >> LINUX_SYMTAB_FILE Makefile" in your BLCR build directory).  If they
    >> match, then it is possible that something is happening with respect to
    >> kernel linking/relocation that BLCR is not prepared to deal with.  If
    >> they don't match then it might still be a relocation issue, but more
    >> likely it means BLCR found the wrong file.  If that is the
    >> case, try passing --with-system-map=[WHATEVER] when configuring BLCR. 
    >> Let us know what you find.
    > hmm, the addresses in the /boot/ file and 
    > the ones from /proc/kallsyms (same kernel shipped by fedora) are
    > different. weird. I'll investigate.
    dunno why this is not the same.
    >>> what about glibc 2.6 ?    
    >> What about it?  I don't have any systems running glibc 2.6.  If you have
    >> specific problems (once past the problem), please let us know
    >> and we'll see what we can do to sort them out.
    > I will as soon as i get that module loaded ! :)
    so I generated a real with :
    	$ cat /proc/kallsyms >
    configured, built and run 'make check' :
    PASS: atomics
    PASS: cr_run
    PASS: bug2003
    PASS: simple.ct
    PASS: simple_pthread.ct
    PASS: cwd.ct
    PASS: dup.ct
    PASS: filedescriptors.ct
    PASS: pipe.ct
    PASS: named_fifo.ct
    PASS: cloexec.ct
    PASS: get_info.ct
    PASS: orphan.ct
    PASS: overlap.ct
    PASS: child.ct
    PASS: mmaps.ct
    No hugetlbfs mount point found (test skipped)
    SKIP: hugetlbfs.ct
    PASS: readdir.ct
    PASS: dev_null.ct
    PASS: cr_signal.ct
    PASS: linked_fifo.ct
    All 27 tests passed
    (1 tests were not run)
    it seems fine on a bare fc7. I suppose that the tests are doing a 
    checkpoint+restart sequence. right ? 
    thanks !

  • Next message: Paul H. Hargrove: "Re: Announcing the release of BLCR 0.6.0_beta1"