|
|
#1 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 47
|
On a fujitsu laptop I'm unable to build any kernel modules on kernels since about 2.6.33 till the latest 2.6.36-rc with any driver versions, including the latest 260.19.06. The error is error: #error acpi_walk_namespace() conftest failed!
Attached is a gzip of the nvidia installer log. Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 47
|
Attached is the output from nvidia-bug report as well, in case it's helpful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 193
|
Take a look at this thread, Con: http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=142794
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 47
|
Doesn't help I'm afraid. Those changes already exist in the newer drivers. This appears to be something else. Thanks though!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Linux kernel hacker
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 173
|
Mmm.. the first error in the nvidia log you posted was "ERROR: Kernel configuration is invalid.". So the installer is having trouble recognizing or finding your configured kernel source tree.
If you can get over that hump, then rest assured it does build (and run) with the latest 2.6.35.7 kernel, and earlier ones too. Is that really Con ? Cheers -ml |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Linux kernel hacker
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 173
|
So.. the build script "knows" about these two paths on your system:
/lib/modules/2.6.36-rc7-ck1/source /lib/modules/2.6.36-rc7-ck1/build Ordinarily, both would be symlinks pointing to exactly the same place. But if you have the kbuild output files in a separate tree, pointed to by "build", then they will differ. I wonder if that confuses the nvidia build scripts? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 47
|
Yes I am me
![]() No, the driver hasn't had a problem with separate source/build directories for a long time. In this case, also, they are not separate. I used to have an older patched kernel that worked, but I can't figure out who patched what and where I got it from since it was months and months ago. The error of not finding the source tree is an invalid error. Many times in the past I tried forcing it to exactly where everything was and it still came up with the same error. edit: I'll check to see just *what* was patched in the one that did work... maybe it'll give me a hint. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 47
|
I've checked what was in the patched one and got the following patch:
Quote:
+#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE >= KERNEL_VERSION(2, 6, 33) +#define acpi_walk_namespace(a,b,c,d,e,f) acpi_walk_namespace(a,b,c,d,e,f,NULL) +#endif so I applied it to the equivalent file in the 260.19.06 driver but alas it still failed to build with the same error message. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 47
|
Well, I can't for the life of me see why conftest fails on this one, but I just went in manually and edited the conftest.sh to force acpi_walk_namespace to 7 arguments, and then had to also force pci_dma_mapping_error to 2 arguments and it built fine. So now I have a driver, but I have no idea why the testing fails. NOTE: I do run a 64 bit kernel on a 32bit userspace so perhaps that's why? I usually install the 32bit driver without building a kernel module and build the module from the 64 bit driver... By the way, it would be nice if the driver could detect a 64 on 32 configuration and adapt accordingly. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 47
|
...No comment on this thread?
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|