Re: is SMP 0.2.11-2.4.3 OK?

[Joseph Mack <mack.joseph@xxxxxxx>]

Joseph Mack wrote:
> 
> Julian Anastasov wrote:
> >
> >         Hello Joe,
> >
> > On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Joseph Mack wrote:
> >
> > > I just changed over to an SMP director. The
> > > 0.2.11-2.4.3 runs fine on a UMP machine. I get
> > > errors with depmod -a (unresolved symbols in these files)
> >
> >         May be the __SMP__ flag in ipvs/Makefile:
> 
> yes that's it. 

spoke too soon.

If I build ip_vs "in the kernel" (whatever that means)
not as a module, the schedulers are built as modules.

I can run ipvsadm without an ip_vs module loaded, which
means that the ip_vs code is in the kernel, just fine.
I can't load any ipvsadm commands to setup an LVS
(can't find ip_vs_rr etc), so presumably the ip_vs_rr
isn't built into the kernel.

When I try to load the ip_vs_rr module I get

#: insmod ip_vs_rr
/lib/modules/2.4.3/kernel/net/ipv4/ipvs/ip_vs_rr.o: unresolved symbol 
register_ip_vs_scheduler
/lib/modules/2.4.3/kernel/net/ipv4/ipvs/ip_vs_rr.o: unresolved symbol 
ip_vs_get_debug_level
/lib/modules/2.4.3/kernel/net/ipv4/ipvs/ip_vs_rr.o: unresolved symbol 
unregister_ip_vs_scheduler
Using /lib/modules/2.4.3/kernel/net/ipv4/ipvs/ip_vs_rr.o

Any suggestions?

Thanks Joe

-- 
Joseph Mack PhD, Senior Systems Engineer, Lockheed Martin
contractor to the National Environmental Supercomputer Center, 
mailto:mack.joseph@xxxxxxx ph# 919-541-0007, RTP, NC, USA