Invalid module format
26 views
Skip to first unread message
Paul Beam
Jun 4, 2021, 5:20:35 PM6/4/21
to BeagleBoard
I'm trying to build a new driver for a Realtek 8821C for the PocketBeagle, and although I have managed to cross-compile the module, it fails to load with an "invalid format" error, which I think means it thinks I compiled with a different kernel version.
My PB is still running "4.14-ti", and I downloaded Robert's "rt-4.14" branch onto my build machine thinking that "4.14" should be close enough. Is my problem the "ti" branch vs the "rt" branch? I guess I can build it on the PB if I have to, but it is much faster to build on my desktop and, theoretically, easier to keep track of.
My PB is still running "4.14-ti", and I downloaded Robert's "rt-4.14" branch onto my build machine thinking that "4.14" should be close enough. Is my problem the "ti" branch vs the "rt" branch? I guess I can build it on the PB if I have to, but it is much faster to build on my desktop and, theoretically, easier to keep track of.
Robert Nelson
Jun 4, 2021, 5:22:23 PM6/4/21
to Beagle Board
On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 4:20 PM Paul Beam <rpau...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm trying to build a new driver for a Realtek 8821C for the PocketBeagle, and although I have managed to cross-compile the module, it fails to load with an "invalid format" error, which I think means it thinks I compiled with a different kernel version.
>
> My PB is still running "4.14-ti", and I downloaded Robert's "rt-4.14" branch onto my build machine thinking that "4.14" should be close enough. Is my problem the "ti" branch vs the "rt" branch? I guess I can build it on the PB if I have to, but it is much faster to build on my desktop and, theoretically, easier to keep track of.
sudo apt install linux-headers-`uname -r`
>
> I'm trying to build a new driver for a Realtek 8821C for the PocketBeagle, and although I have managed to cross-compile the module, it fails to load with an "invalid format" error, which I think means it thinks I compiled with a different kernel version.
>
> My PB is still running "4.14-ti", and I downloaded Robert's "rt-4.14" branch onto my build machine thinking that "4.14" should be close enough. Is my problem the "ti" branch vs the "rt" branch? I guess I can build it on the PB if I have to, but it is much faster to build on my desktop and, theoretically, easier to keep track of.
Regards,
--
Robert Nelson
https://rcn-ee.com/
Paul Beam
Jun 7, 2021, 9:23:48 AM6/7/21
to BeagleBoard
Thanks, Robert. That would work if I were compiling on the PB, but cross-compiling on my Debian VM was different. There may be an easier way, but what I did was follow this: http://phwl.org/2021/building-bbg-kernel/ to checkout the exact kernel I have on my PB, compile it, and then point my driver Makefile to this directory. This at least appears to work.
Robert Nelson
Jun 7, 2021, 9:41:37 AM6/7/21
to Beagle Board
On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 8:23 AM Paul Beam <rpau...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks, Robert. That would work if I were compiling on the PB, but cross-compiling on my Debian VM was different. There may be an easier way, but what I did was follow this: http://phwl.org/2021/building-bbg-kernel/ to checkout the exact kernel I have on my PB, compile it, and then point my driver Makefile to this directory. This at least appears to work.
Okay, that would also work..
>
> Thanks, Robert. That would work if I were compiling on the PB, but cross-compiling on my Debian VM was different. There may be an easier way, but what I did was follow this: http://phwl.org/2021/building-bbg-kernel/ to checkout the exact kernel I have on my PB, compile it, and then point my driver Makefile to this directory. This at least appears to work.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages