[CentOS] Missing file in current kernel-devel package

Thu Oct 5 17:06:14 UTC 2017
m.roth at 5-cent.us <m.roth at 5-cent.us>

Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 10/05/2017 10:17 AM, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote:
>> Albert McCann wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: CentOS [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On Behalf Of m.roth at 5-
>>>> cent.us
>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 10:58 AM
>>>> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Missing file in current kernel-devel package
>>>> Fred Smith wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 09:56:57AM -0400, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote:
>>>>>>    I've identified what my problem is, trying to install the NVidia
>>>>>> proprietary drivers: in kernel-devel-3.10.0-514.26.2.el7.x86_64,
>>>>>> there is a file
>>>>>> /usr/src/kernels/3.10.0-514.26.2.el7.x86_64/include/linux/fence.h
>>>>>>    It does not exist in the kernel-devel-3.10.0-693.2.2.el7.x86_64
>>>>>> package. Is this something that got missed, or did HR drop it,
>>>> or....?
>>>>> I'm running that kernel with Nvidia 384.90, but I get the nvidia
>>>>> driver from elrepo. where do you get yours?
>>>> Proprietary NVidia. Still, why is fence.h suddenly not there?
>>> While I'm running the Plus kernel, it has the same files. What I'm
>>> seeing here is that fence.h has been renamed in the 693 kernel to
>>> # locate fence.h
>>> /usr/src/kernels/3.10.0-514.26.2.el7.centos.plus.x86_64/include/linux/fence.h
>>> /usr/src/kernels/3.10.0-514.26.2.el7.centos.plus.x86_64/include/linux/seqno-fence.h
>>> /usr/src/kernels/3.10.0-514.26.2.el7.centos.plus.x86_64/include/trace/events/fenhttps://lwn.net/Articles/685049/ce.h
>>> /usr/src/kernels/3.10.0-693.2.2.el7.centos.plus.x86_64/include/linux/dma-fence.h
>>> /usr/src/kernels/3.10.0-693.2.2.el7.centos.plus.x86_64/include/linux/seqno-fence.h
>>> /usr/src/kernels/3.10.0-693.2.2.el7.centos.plus.x86_64/include/trace/events/dma_fence.h
>>> Looks like upstream renamed it for some reason.
>> Not good - I did a diff of fence.h and dma_fence.h, it *appears* to be
>> the
>> same structures, but all with different names. That's not going to
>> compile.
>> Sorry, but I really don't believe it is good, much less best practice to
>> do something like removing a kernel include file within one release. If
>> they'd made it go a away for 7.0, I would deal, but to suddenly drop it,
>> bad.
> Tell it to Linus, not us:
> https://lwn.net/Articles/685049/

Read taht, and two things aren't clear to me: first, there a long
discussion of fence for andoroid. Secon, at the bottom, it's still showing

I've also just d/l the current proprietary driver from NVida - I had 375,
this is 384, and when I decide, sometime this afternoon, to reboot, come
up with the new kernel, I'll try building that.