From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from fallback.mail.elte.hu (fallback.mail.elte.hu [157.181.151.13]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F279B7B69 for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:29:03 +1000 (EST) Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]) by fallback.mail.elte.hu with esmtp (Exim) id 1Mpzo1-0003is-LW from for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:28:57 +0200 Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:28:34 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf_event, powerpc: Fix compilation after big perf_counter rename Message-ID: <20090922072834.GA25470@elte.hu> References: <19128.4280.813369.589704@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <1253584591.7103.197.camel@pasglop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1253584591.7103.197.camel@pasglop> Cc: Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras , Linus Torvalds , "David S. Miller" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , * Benjamin Herrenschmidt 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