[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: kerneld message / Workaround

On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 01:05:42PM +0300, Pavel M. Penev wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2000, brian moore wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 15, 2000 at 11:51:06AM +0100, Jonathan Heaney wrote:
> > > David Wright wrote:
> > > > The scripts /etc/init.d/{kerneld,modutils} have to be able to handle
> > > > both 2.0 and 2.2 kernels with kerneld or kmod. You will see they do
> > > > this by testing for the presence of /proc/sys/kernel/modprobe which
> > > > only exists under 2.2.
> > 
> > But doesn't -always- exist on 2.2:
> > 
> > [narvi:/etc/init.d] 11:26:37am 136 % ls -l /proc/sys/kernel/modprobe
> > ls: /proc/sys/kernel/modprobe: No such file or directory
> > [narvi:/etc/init.d] 11:26:39am 137 % uname -a
> > Linux narvi 2.2.16 #6 Fri Jun 23 13:51:08 PDT 2000 i686 unknown
> > 
> > You need to have 'CONFIG_KMOD' set in your kernel build to have it,
> > which I don't.
> > 
> > Seems to me that the logic on that is broken.  /proc/sys/kernel/modprobe
> > is not a good way to determine whether kerneld should be run.
> What I think is that you are wrong.

Well, you're allowed your own opinions, even if they are boneheaded and
not backed up by facts.

> If you have compiled your kernel with
> 'CONFIG_KMOD' defined, then you would have kmod built into your
> kernel. "kmod" is a REPLACEMENT for kerneld, remember?

Yes, and 'kerneld' is for 2.0, -NOT- 2.2.

|        kerneld is obsolete as of  Linux  kernel  2.1.90,  it  was
|        replaced  by  the kmod kernel thread and cron entries.  Do
|        not even think of using kerneld unless you are  running  a
|        2.0 kernel.

See that?  It says DO NOT run kerneld on anything but 2.0.  NOT.  BAD.

Got it?

Now, the logic in /etc/init.d/kerneld -WILL- run it if you build a 2.2
(remember that number?) kernel with 'CONFIG_KMOD' undefined.  See, in
that case, /proc/sys/kernel/modprobe will NOT exist, which is how
/etc/init.d/kerneld determines the version of your kernel.

Go check the source.  The /proc entry for sys/kernel/modprobe is in

        {KERN_MODPROBE, "modprobe", &modprobe_path, 256,
         0644, NULL, &proc_dostring, &sysctl_string },

See the #ifdef?  Yep, /proc/sys/kernel/modprobe only exists if KMOD is

> > Perhaps you should file a bug on it?
> Don't be that fast.

Why not?  A bug is a bug.  'man kerneld' is quite clear that kerneld
should -not- be run on a 2.2 kernel.  Yet /etc/init.d/kerneld is quite
happy to run it on a 2.2 kernel because it uses an incorrect method for
testing the version of the kernel.

Why is that not a bug?

Brian Moore                       | Of course vi is God's editor.
      Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker     | If He used Emacs, He'd still be waiting
      Usenet Vandal               |  for it to load on the seventh day.
      Netscum, Bane of Elves.

Reply to: