Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:28:34 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf_event, powerpc: Fix compilation after big perf_counter rename |
| |
* Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> 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
| |