Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH -next] riscv: perf_event: Make some funciton static | From | Kefeng Wang <> | Date | Mon, 11 May 2020 09:30:36 +0800 |
| |
On 2020/5/9 1:13, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > What's the "-next" for? This seems appropriate for an RC to me, as > it's a > build fix.
Thanks for your review, this patch and "[PATCH -next] riscv: perf: RISCV_BASE_PMU
should be closeable", I fix the issue based on linux-next, so add the next prefix ; )
and we also found some another build issue when add RISCV arch to huawei build robot,
will send out the patches later.
> > On Thu, 07 May 2020 08:04:44 PDT (-0700), wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com > wrote: >> Fixes the following warning detected when running make with W=1, >> ../arch/riscv/kernel/perf_event.c:150:5: warning: no previous >> prototype for ‘riscv_map_cache_decode’ [-Wmissing-prototypes] >> int riscv_map_cache_decode(u64 config, unsigned int *type, >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> ../arch/riscv/kernel/perf_event.c:345:13: warning: no previous >> prototype for ‘riscv_base_pmu_handle_irq’ [-Wmissing-prototypes] >> irqreturn_t riscv_base_pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev) >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> ../arch/riscv/kernel/perf_event.c:364:6: warning: no previous >> prototype for ‘release_pmc_hardware’ [-Wmissing-prototypes] >> void release_pmc_hardware(void) >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> ../arch/riscv/kernel/perf_event.c:467:12: warning: no previous >> prototype for ‘init_hw_perf_events’ [-Wmissing-prototypes] >> int __init init_hw_perf_events(void) >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> Cc: Alan Kao <alankao@andestech.com> >> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> >> --- >> arch/riscv/kernel/perf_event.c | 8 ++++---- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/perf_event.c >> b/arch/riscv/kernel/perf_event.c >> index 91626d9ae5f2..c835f0362d94 100644 >> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/perf_event.c >> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/perf_event.c >> @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ static int riscv_map_hw_event(u64 config) >> return riscv_pmu->hw_events[config]; >> } >> >> -int riscv_map_cache_decode(u64 config, unsigned int *type, >> +static int riscv_map_cache_decode(u64 config, unsigned int *type, >> unsigned int *op, unsigned int *result) >> { >> return -ENOENT; >> @@ -342,7 +342,7 @@ static void riscv_pmu_del(struct perf_event >> *event, int flags) >> >> static DEFINE_MUTEX(pmc_reserve_mutex); >> >> -irqreturn_t riscv_base_pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev) >> +static irqreturn_t riscv_base_pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev) >> { >> return IRQ_NONE; >> } >> @@ -361,7 +361,7 @@ static int reserve_pmc_hardware(void) >> return err; >> } >> >> -void release_pmc_hardware(void) >> +static void release_pmc_hardware(void) >> { >> mutex_lock(&pmc_reserve_mutex); >> if (riscv_pmu->irq >= 0) >> @@ -464,7 +464,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id >> riscv_pmu_of_ids[] = { >> { /* sentinel value */ } >> }; >> >> -int __init init_hw_perf_events(void) >> +static int __init init_hw_perf_events(void) >> { >> struct device_node *node = of_find_node_by_type(NULL, "pmu"); >> const struct of_device_id *of_id; > > Reviewed-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com> > > . >
| |