From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Greylist: delayed 580 seconds by postgrey-1.34 at layers.openembedded.org; Tue, 20 May 2014 14:11:19 UTC Received: from mga01.intel.com (unknown [192.55.52.88]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BF6165E87 for ; Tue, 20 May 2014 14:11:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 May 2014 07:01:40 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.98,874,1392192000"; d="scan'208";a="542101894" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.255.12.90]) ([10.255.12.90]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 May 2014 07:01:18 -0700 Message-ID: <1400594477.24339.47.camel@empanada> From: Tom Zanussi To: Richard Purdie Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 09:01:17 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1400593365.28353.215.camel@ted> References: <1400155748-26271-1-git-send-email-Martin.Jansa@gmail.com> <1400593365.28353.215.camel@ted> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.5 (3.8.5-2.fc19) Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] lttng-modules: Fix build with older kernels X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 14:11:22 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 14:42 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Thu, 2014-05-15 at 14:09 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > > * forward port this patch from daisy: > > commit c11b29ff4f24af0445c3c6a694b8dc2037dcd7e4 > > Author: Tom Zanussi > > Date: Thu Mar 6 22:26:20 2014 -0600 > > > > lttng-modules: Fix 3.14 bio tracepoints > > > > * how is it possible that it's in daisy but not in master? > > It looks like we have two versions of lttng-modules and friends. The > patch was applied in master and daisy to 2.4.0 but not to 2.3.3. > > Why do we have two versions of the lttng pieces? :( One works on arm and > the other doesn't? > Right, rather than completely pulling the rug out from under arm users, the 2.3.3 pieces that didn't have arm blacklisted was left in place as an option for them. Tom > Anyhow, the change was in master and daisy. > > Cheers, > > Richard > >