From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965853Ab0COXyy (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:54:54 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f219.google.com ([209.85.220.219]:44383 "EHLO mail-fx0-f219.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965803Ab0COXyu (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:54:50 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=hyBlFy4mrxg/VNxjc9NQ6+asP7NjxxNHih+SHTGoEAnoasZNw5/EbYvlLr765vMWer iV5tQZeU6VmMFh7cUonTJpoXGvxdcKvxQcxYWRqcrmLx7T0mcpjX9yzrnjSy8RhjMgtr h/3Kz2zVbKlsDo0fN41LI7x+LfjlC2kElXGLk= Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:54:52 +0100 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Ingo Molnar , LKML , " H . Peter Anvin " , Thomas Gleixner , Linux Next , Peter Zijlstra , Xiao Guangrong , Paul Mackerras Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] perf: Fix unexported generic perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs Message-ID: <20100315235450.GB8849@nowhere> References: <1268686806-7286-1-git-send-regression-fweisbec@gmail.com> <1268691442-8300-1-git-send-regression-fweisbec@gmail.com> <20100316093355.071fde51.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100316093355.071fde51.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 09:33:55AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Frederic, > > On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:17:22 +0100 Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > > perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs() is exported for the overriden x86 > > version, but not for the generic weak version. > > As a general rule, weak functions should have their symbol exported > ^ > "not" Ooh, right. > > in the same file they are defined. > > > > So let's export it on trace_event_perf.c as it is used by trace > > events only. > > Otherwise, looks good (though I haven't tested it). I've tested with some trace event built as module and it looks fine so far. Thanks.