Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 18 May 2015 16:31:46 +0200 | From | Jiri Olsa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf tools: Fix dwarf-aux.c compilation on i386 |
| |
On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 10:20:29PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Sat, May 16, 2015 at 08:21:49AM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu: > > On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 04:59:31PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > Em Fri, May 15, 2015 at 06:23:11PM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu: > > > > Replacing %lu format strings for Dwarf_Addr type with PRIu64 as it > > > > fits for Dwarf_Addr (defined as uint64_t) type and works also on > > > > both 32/64 bits. > > > > Please try to always indicate against which branch your patches > > > should be applied, be it as [PATCH perf/core], [PATCH perf/urgent] for > > > isolated patches, or on the cover letter [GIT PULL 0/N perf/core], or as > > > I do with Ingo, "[GIT PULL] perf/core fixes". > > > > I thought, for this one, hey, its a fix, should go soon to Ingo! > > > Tried to apply to perf/urgent, and it didn't apply :-\ > > > > Applying to perf/core instead now. > > > hum, I've never rebased against perf/urgent, I'll try > > to squeeze it in next time ;-) > > In general, if it is a fix, try to check if it should be applied to > perf/urgent first, if that is not the case, then it is fixing a bug > introduced in perf/core, where it should go. > > If you don't make it clear where to apply, then the burden is on me to > check, if I have to do it for everybody... it doesn't scale :-)
ok, will try to do it next time
thanks, jirka
| |