On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 16:22 -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:Yup. There was (what I thought was) a bug in the existing logic (an explicit match on "ndiswrapper", and a setting of the global kernel taint flags) and I corrected it to do what I thought it was actually intending to do, but hadn't been. Was I mistaken? What's the point of setting the global taint if we don't know why we set that? Yes it is. But I thought the existing code was intending to taint the kernel (that's what it does), so it would really help to identify why it tainted the kernel, by calling add_taint_module instead of add_taint. I didn't put the existing match in there...don't shoot the messenger :) Another fix would be for ndiswrapper to explicitly set the taint when it loads a tainted driver? Or do we just want to go back to globally "tainting" the kernel without assigning the blame to any module? Jon. --
| James Bottomley | Breakage caused by unreviewed patch in x86 tree |
| Andrew Morton | Re: POHMELFS high performance network filesystem. Transactions, failover, performa... |
| Randy Dunlap | Re: 2.6.25-rc5-mm1 (paravirt/vsmp/no PCI) |
| Arnd Hannemann | 2.6.24-rc8 hangs at mfgpt-timer |
| Theodore Ts'o | Re: SVGA-alphanum. modes |
| Joseph R. Pannon | More install questions |
| Paul Richards | Header files |
| Les Andrzejewski | X386/WD90C31/SUMSUNG SYNC MASTER 4 |
git: | |
| David Miller | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| David Miller | Re: iptables very slow after commit784544739a25c30637397ace5489eeb6e15d7d49 |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
