From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Thu, 22 May 2014 15:36:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:56112 "EHLO linux-mips.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S6817074AbaEVNggbH2pA (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 May 2014 15:36:36 +0200 Received: from scotty.linux-mips.net (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by scotty.linux-mips.net (8.14.7/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s4MDaZCI012202; Thu, 22 May 2014 15:36:35 +0200 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by scotty.linux-mips.net (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id s4MDaZ9B012201; Thu, 22 May 2014 15:36:35 +0200 Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 15:36:35 +0200 From: Ralf Baechle To: Paul Bolle Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: BCM1480: remove checks for CONFIG_SIBYTE_BCM1480_PROF Message-ID: <20140522133635.GE10287@linux-mips.org> References: <1400750659.16832.24.camel@x220> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1400750659.16832.24.camel@x220> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 40242 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: linux-mips X-List-ID: linux-mips List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: linux-mips On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 11:24:19AM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: > There are two checks for CONFIG_SIBYTE_BCM1480_PROF in the tree since > v2.6.15. The related Kconfig symbol has never been added to the tree. So > these checks have always evaluated to false. Besides, one of these > checks guards a call of sbprof_cpu_intr(). But that function is not > defined. Remove all this. > > Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle > --- > Untested. > > Until v2.6.23 there also were checks for CONFIG_SIBYTE_SB1250_PROF in > the tree. There also was a Kconfig symbol SIBYTE_SB1250_PROF so it was > possible to make these checks evaluate to true. But, since one of these > checks also guarded a call of sbprof_cpu_intr(), that should have made > the build fail with an error. The Sibyte profiling was far inferior to later solutions such as oprofile or perf and non-standard anyway. So let's kill what's left over. Ralf