From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jon Bernard <jbernard@debian.org>
Subject: Re: Debian 3.16.7-ckt9-2 issue with lttng-modules kmem
	probe
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 12:59:35 -0400
Message-ID: <20150424165935.GA5843__36340.8153564253$1429894827$gmane$org@helmut>
References: <1082981755.35270.1429823095435.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
 <844104542.35292.1429823245769.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <lttng-dev-bounces@lists.lttng.org>
Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28])
 by ltt.polymtl.ca with esmtp (Exim 4.80)
 (envelope-from <jbernard@debian.org>) id 1Ylgwy-0007Qr-Lf
 for lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org; Fri, 24 Apr 2015 12:59:40 -0400
Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46])
 by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 326C02069E
 for <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>; Fri, 24 Apr 2015 12:59:36 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <844104542.35292.1429823245769.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/lttng-dev>,
 <mailto:lttng-dev-request@lists.lttng.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.lttng.org/pipermail/lttng-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lttng-dev-request@lists.lttng.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev>,
 <mailto:lttng-dev-request@lists.lttng.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: lttng-dev-bounces@lists.lttng.org
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: lttng-dev <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>, Alexandre Montplaisir <alexmonthy@efficios.com>
List-Id: lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org

* Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
> Hi Jon,
> 
> It appears that lttng-modules cannot build on the
> Debian kernel 3.16.0-4-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 3.16.7-ckt9-2 (2015-04-13)
> x86_64 GNU/Linux.
> 
> It appears that their exported kmem.h header differs from
> the upstream stable branch, but AFAIK there is no Debian-specific
> version number available to distinguish between upstream stable
> and the Debian kernel.

Indeed.  The only distinguishing characteristic I see is EXTRAVERSION
defined to '-ckt9'.  I haven't had a chance to try yet, but could that
be acceptable?

> We have been hit by this in the past for Ubuntu kernels, and the
> solution has been to introduce a UTS_UBUNTU_RELEASE_ABI define
> into their kernels, which can be used to follow their own kernel
> versions.
> 
> Do you think we could ask Debian to do the same ?

I'm happy to ask, the argument is certainly sound.

-- 
Jon