lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] perf_event, powerpc: Fix compilation after big perf_counter rename

    * Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:

    > On Tue, 2009-09-22 at 09:48 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
    >
    > > This fixes two places in the powerpc perf_event (perf_counter) code
    > > where 'list_entry' needs to be changed to 'group_entry', but were
    > > missed in commit 65abc865 ("perf_counter: Rename list_entry ->
    > > group_entry, counter_list -> group_list").

    Oops, indeed - queued up the fix and will send it to Linus shortly -
    thanks!

    > Ingo: This is becoming a recurring one now... powerpc build upstream
    > is broken approx everyday by some new perfctr build breakage.
    >
    > You really aren't build testing other architectures than x86 right ?

    On the contrary - i am build testing every architecture on a daily
    basis. (and sometimes i do it multiple times a day - yesterday i did 5
    cross builds during the rename) In fact i am testing more architectures
    than linux-next does.

    Here's the log of the test i ran yesterday before i sent those bits to
    Linus:

    testing 24 architectures.
    (warns) (warns)
    testing alpha: -git: pass ( 24), -tip: pass ( 24)
    testing arm: -git: fail ( 11), -tip: fail ( 13)
    testing blackfin: -git: pass ( 3), -tip: pass ( 3)
    testing cris: -git: fail ( 34), -tip: pass ( 20)
    testing frv: -git: fail ( 13), -tip: fail ( 13)
    testing h8300: -git: fail ( 441), -tip: fail ( 185)
    testing i386: -git: pass ( 2), -tip: pass ( 5)
    testing ia64: -git: fail ( 172), -tip: pass ( 160)
    testing m32r: -git: pass ( 39), -tip: pass ( 39)
    testing m68k: -git: pass ( 42), -tip: pass ( 42)
    testing m68knommu: -git: fail ( 80), -tip: fail ( 80)
    testing microblaze: -git: fail ( 14), -tip: fail ( 14)
    testing mips: -git: pass ( 6), -tip: pass ( 6)
    testing mn10300: -git: fail ( 10), -tip: fail ( 10)
    testing parisc: -git: pass ( 26), -tip: pass ( 26)
    testing powerpc: -git: fail ( 36), -tip: fail ( 45)
    testing s390: -git: pass ( 6), -tip: pass ( 6)
    testing score: -git: fail ( 13), -tip: fail ( 13)
    testing sh: -git: fail ( 22), -tip: fail ( 19)
    testing sparc: -git: pass ( 3), -tip: pass ( 3)
    testing um: -git: pass ( 3), -tip: pass ( 3)
    testing xtensa: -git: fail ( 46), -tip: fail ( 46)
    testing x86-64: -git: pass ( 0), -tip: pass ( 0)
    testing x86-32: -git: pass ( 0), -tip: pass ( 0)

    In fact there are architectures that dont build in Linus's tree and
    build in -tip:

    testing cris: -git: fail ( 34), -tip: pass ( 20)

    Because not only do i test every architecture i also try to fix upstream
    bugs on non-x86 pro-actively. See for example this upstream fix:

    8d7ac69: Blackfin: Fix link errors with binutils 2.19 and GCC 4.3

    Nevertheless you are right that i should have caught this particular
    PowerPC build bug - i missed it - sorry about that!

    Thanks,

    Ingo


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-09-22 09:31    [W:0.025 / U:0.708 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site