Re: [PATCH 1/1] perf build: fix "argument list too long" in second location

[James Clark]

On 21/04/2026 22:12, Markus Mayer wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2026 at 10:47, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 11:26:42AM -0700, Markus Mayer wrote:
> > > On Tue, 14 Apr 2026 at 03:43, James Clark <james.clark@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On 11/04/2026 02:07, Markus Mayer wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 10 Apr 2026 at 02:25, James Clark <james.clark@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > On 09/04/2026 11:14 pm, Markus Mayer wrote:
> > > > > > > Turns out that displaying "RM $^" via quiet_cmd_rm can also upset the
> > > > > > > shell and cause it to display "argument list too long".
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Trying to quote $^ doesn't help.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In the end, *not* displaying the (potentially long) list of files is
> > > > > > > probably the right thing to do for a "quiet" message, anyway. Instead,
> > > > > > > let's display a count of how many files were removed. There is always
> > > > > > > V=1 if more detail is required.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >      TEST    linux/tools/perf/pmu-events/metric_test.log
> > > > > > >      RM      ...634 orphan file(s)...
> > > > > > >      LD      linux/tools/perf/util/perf-util-in.o
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Also move the comment regarding xargs before the rule, so it doesn't
> > > > > > > show up in the build output.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm assuming this is just a cosmetic issue so it doesn't need a fixes
> > > > > > tag? And "upsetting the shell" doesn't cause a build failure?
> > > > >
> > > > > No. It's not just cosmetic. It absolutely DOES cause a build failure.
> > > > >
> > > > >   From the cover letter in this thread:
> > > > >
> > > > >     GEN     linux/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64/arm/neoverse-v3/extra-metricgroups.json
> > > > >     TEST    linux/tools/perf/pmu-events/metric_test.log
> > > > > make[5]: /bin/sh: Argument list too long
> > > > > make[5]: *** [pmu-events/Build:220: prune_orphans] Error 127
> > > >
> > > > Ah in that case it should have a fixes: tag then. And it's worth putting
> > > > the actual build failure in the commit message IMO.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, it looks like the patch was already applied.[1] Is
> > > there anything I (or someone else) can do to fix up that commit
> > > message in the way you are suggesting?
> >
> > It's already merged to the Linus tree.  I don't think we can change that
> > anymore.
>
> Agreed. If Linus already merged it, it is too late. Sorry guys.
>
> Regards,
> -Markus

No worries, it's not that big of a deal