From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e24smtp01.br.ibm.com (e24smtp01.br.ibm.com [32.104.18.85]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e24smtp01.br.ibm.com", Issuer "GeoTrust SSL CA" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D8FCB7010 for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 20:25:01 +1000 (EST) Received: from /spool/local by e24smtp01.br.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 14 May 2012 07:24:53 -0300 Received: from d24relay03.br.ibm.com (d24relay03.br.ibm.com [9.13.184.25]) by d24dlp01.br.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04DF4352004A for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 07:24:45 -0300 (BRT) Received: from d24av01.br.ibm.com (d24av01.br.ibm.com [9.8.31.91]) by d24relay03.br.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id q4EAONt057999620 for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 07:24:24 -0300 Received: from d24av01.br.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d24av01.br.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id q4E8OfrH005735 for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 05:24:41 -0300 Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 15:54:38 +0530 From: "K.Prasad" To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [Patch][hw-breakpoint] Use generic hw-breakpoint interfaces for new PPC ptrace flags Message-ID: <20120514102438.GA31573@in.ibm.com> References: <20120511084338.GA31696@in.ibm.com> <1336956822.6727.4.camel@pasglop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1336956822.6727.4.camel@pasglop> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, David Gibson Reply-To: prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 10:53:42AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 14:13 +0530, K.Prasad wrote: > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT > > + int ret, len = 0; > > + struct thread_struct *thread = &(child->thread); > > + struct perf_event *bp; > > + struct perf_event_attr attr; > > +#endif /* CONFIG_HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT */ > > "ret" is unused in that function, causing a warning which breaks the > build since we have -Werror. I'm fixing that locally but be more careful > next time please. > > Ben. Sorry about that warning, I clearly missed that. I guess you do a custom build with -Werror flag enabled, unlike what the normal Makefile does? Thanks, K.Prasad