From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1759265Ab0CMPDN (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sat, 13 Mar 2010 10:03:13 -0500
Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.155]:17246 "EHLO
	fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1759228Ab0CMPDL (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 13 Mar 2010 10:03:11 -0500
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version
         :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent;
        b=UYsJFsxRicpuQQM8JSyegkGY9c3dSzt77Wb9/ZaaVMox9AKaDNOHtO9PtRt4T6vb6b
         57sNGUPgRCSW62cpvKkgu/Gcm5Pb7cBqO+56vtc040+Blr7zWdz7E2rlHpxqhEdTS3zI
         ypBNp1IX9r1K+VmRY8JSbbLn3WZUefF5AwYzQ=
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 18:03:05 +0300
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
       LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86,perf: Unmask LVTPC only if we have APIC supported
Message-ID: <20100313150305.GE18623@lenovo>
References: <20100313081116.GA5179@lenovo> <20100313122432.GA10810@elte.hu> <20100313123256.GC5179@lenovo> <20100313124036.GA17769@elte.hu> <20100313134256.GB18623@lenovo> <20100313135022.GA4267@elte.hu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20100313135022.GA4267@elte.hu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 02:50:22PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
...
> > All-in-once: unresolved external symbol here, which could be fixed either by 
> > introducing dummy symbol, or conditional compilation. I think the second is 
> > preferred if the issue is just one line code.
> > 
> > Or you mean something different and I took a wrong mind-path?
> 
> Well it's not just one line of code as (like you mentioned) perf_event.c is 
> affected as well.
> 
> Introducing a dummy (NOP) placeholder method is what we are doing in all the 
> other cases (such as spin_lock()), we dont pollute the kernel with #ifdefs.
> 
> 	Ingo
> 

ok, Ingo, this will consume some time. Could you pick up the original patch
just for now (so that testing builds will not fail), I'll back to this task
tomorrow or at Monday. OK?

	-- Cyrill