From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757769AbYFZKk7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jun 2008 06:40:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754376AbYFZKku (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jun 2008 06:40:50 -0400 Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com ([209.85.200.172]:50041 "EHLO wf-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752800AbYFZKkt (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jun 2008 06:40:49 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:references; b=JM9RYnhYoaD3jEN71QQNEhXpYXjE01di4kKUVrbwu7Mii70nUOsL9FoKAD+yd+wH6k zYKeJB2zBV9KFzn/Jncc7awP7r2I/kKBCXyTjne9QJVXpLHNbHHdyYpOmrqnZl5w9oiH oPgKXekkwoILpLOuZmF+WLY6gm371VrGPubL4= Message-ID: <7c86c4470806260340w5779b9e7p419bde3c039ea6d7@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:40:48 +0200 From: "stephane eranian" Reply-To: eranian@gmail.com To: "Stephen Rothwell" Subject: Re: [patch 05/19] perfmon2 minimal v2: X86 generic code Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20080624021120.2bcca593.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <4858346e.0c58560a.394e.3498@mx.google.com> <20080624021120.2bcca593.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Stephen, The patch series is currently structured in such a way that the stack is not build-able at each step. I should add this to the introduction but you have a first "plateau" at perfmon-syscalls. You cannot build before that. As for the linux-next, I do not use it currently, I am still on mainline, maybe that's a mistake. I will look into this tree. As for IPI, I hope they have maintained a smp_call_function_single() kind of functionality. Thanks for your feedback and keep it coming. On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Stephane, > > On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:02:22 -0700 (PDT) eranian@googlemail.com wrote: >> >> This patch adds the X86 generic perfmon2 code. It is in charge of >> implementing certain key functionalities required by the generic >> code such as read/write of the PMU registers, low-level interrupt >> handling. > > After applying patches 1-5, building an x86_64 allmodconfig produces > these errors: > > In file included from include/linux/perfmon_kern.h:167, > from arch/x86/perfmon/perfmon.c:25: > include/linux/perfmon_pmu.h:92: warning: 'struct pfarg_pmc' declared inside parameter list > include/linux/perfmon_pmu.h:92: warning: its scope is only this definition or declaration, which is probably not what you want > include/linux/perfmon_pmu.h:96: warning: 'struct pfarg_pmd' declared inside parameter list > > Those structures aren't defined until patch 11. > > In file included from arch/x86/perfmon/perfmon.c:25: > include/linux/perfmon_kern.h: In function 'pfm_copy_thread': > include/linux/perfmon_kern.h:199: error: 'TIF_PERFMON_CTXSW' undeclared (first use in this function) > arch/x86/perfmon/perfmon.c: In function 'smp_pmu_interrupt': > arch/x86/perfmon/perfmon.c:338: error: 'LOCAL_PERFMON_VECTOR' undeclared (first use in this function) > arch/x86/perfmon/perfmon.c: In function 'pfm_arch_resend_irq': > arch/x86/perfmon/perfmon.c:451: error: 'LOCAL_PERFMON_VECTOR' undeclared (first use in this function) > arch/x86/perfmon/perfmon.c: In function 'pfm_arch_pmu_acquire_percpu': > arch/x86/perfmon/perfmon.c:475: error: 'LOCAL_PERFMON_VECTOR' undeclared (first use in this function) > > These are not defined until patch 7. > > So I think some rearrangement is still required. > > Also, some of the x86 files that you are modifying have had their 32 and > 64 bit versions combined in linux-next (which is the stuff of the next > merge window) so just a heads up that there will be more merge work then. > Lastly, some of this will clash with the generic IPIs work. > > I don't want to put you off, you have done great work here, thanks. > > -- > Cheers, > Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au > http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/ >