From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5982552070559599044==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Arjan van de Ven Subject: Re: [Powertop] ia64 builds fails (and maybe alpha too?) Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 07:52:22 -0700 Message-ID: <52274926.7050300@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: 52266E38.3030307@debian.org To: powertop@lists.01.org List-ID: --===============5982552070559599044== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 9/3/2013 4:18 PM, Jose Luis Rivas wrote: > On Tue Sep 3 18:39:26 2013, Arjan van de Ven wrote: >> >> if your kernel does not have "perf", there is no point in using >> powertop.... >> really; it will not work at all. >> >> (including anything asm-generic/foo also is the wrong answer; that >> directory is not architectural >> from a kernel perspective, only for indirect inclusion) >> >> > > It does. I was just writing to Julian about this. It seems like it is > actually a bug in the kernel not having it defined in ia64's unistd.h[0] > (checking Linus's master branch). > > [0] > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/arch/ia64/include/uapi/asm/= unistd.h > > Meaning that it wont fail in alpha, but's failing on ia64 because that > line is missing. Lets add Tony to this... he knows IA64 a lot better than I do --===============5982552070559599044==--