Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf tools: Fix build on powerpc broken by pt/bts

[Jiri Olsa]

On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:27:09AM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 26/08/15 10:25, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 09:57:13AM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> >> On 25/08/15 18:30, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >>> Em Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 01:42:27PM +0300, Adrian Hunter escreveu:
> >>>> It is theoretically possible to process perf.data files created on
> >>>> x86 and that contain Intel PT or Intel BTS data, on any other
> >>>> architecture, which is why it is possible for there to be build
> >>>> errors on powerpc caused by pt/bts.
> >>>>
> >>>> The errors were:
> >>>>
> >>>> 	util/intel-pt-decoder/intel-pt-insn-decoder.c: In function âintel_pt_insn_decoderâ:
> >>>> 	util/intel-pt-decoder/intel-pt-insn-decoder.c:138:3: error: switch missing default case [-Werror=switch-default]
> >>>> 	   switch (insn->immediate.nbytes) {
> >>>> 	   ^
> >>>> 	cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> >>>>
> >>>> 	linux-acme.git/tools/perf/perf-obj/libperf.a(libperf-in.o): In function `intel_pt_synth_branch_sample':
> >>>> 	sources/linux-acme.git/tools/perf/util/intel-pt.c:871: undefined reference to `tsc_to_perf_time'
> >>>> 	linux-acme.git/tools/perf/perf-obj/libperf.a(libperf-in.o): In function `intel_pt_sample':
> >>>> 	sources/linux-acme.git/tools/perf/util/intel-pt.c:915: undefined reference to `tsc_to_perf_time'
> >>>> 	sources/linux-acme.git/tools/perf/util/intel-pt.c:962: undefined reference to `tsc_to_perf_time'
> >>>> 	linux-acme.git/tools/perf/perf-obj/libperf.a(libperf-in.o): In function `intel_pt_process_event':
> >>>> 	sources/linux-acme.git/tools/perf/util/intel-pt.c:1454: undefined reference to `perf_time_to_tsc'
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>  tools/perf/util/Build                                    | 2 +-
> >>>>  tools/perf/util/intel-pt-decoder/intel-pt-insn-decoder.c | 3 +++
> >>>>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/Build b/tools/perf/util/Build
> >>>> index e912856cc4e5..8ae31e5131ee 100644
> >>>> --- a/tools/perf/util/Build
> >>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/Build
> >>>> @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ libperf-y += stat-shadow.o
> >>>>  libperf-y += record.o
> >>>>  libperf-y += srcline.o
> >>>>  libperf-y += data.o
> >>>> -libperf-$(CONFIG_X86) += tsc.o
> >>>> +libperf-$(if $(CONFIG_X86)$(CONFIG_AUXTRACE),y) += tsc.o
> >>>
> >>> I think this is preferred/more clear:
> >>>
> >>> libperf-$(CONFIG_X86) += tsc.o
> >>> libperf-$(CONFIG_AUXTRACE) += tsc.o
> >>
> >> I tried that first but it doesn't work:
> >>
> >> util/tsc.o: In function `perf_time_to_tsc':
> >> /mnt/ssd/ahunter/git/linux-perf/tools/perf/util/tsc.c:7: multiple definition of `perf_time_to_tsc'
> >> util/tsc.o:/mnt/ssd/ahunter/git/linux-perf/tools/perf/util/tsc.c:7: first defined here
> >> util/tsc.o: In function `tsc_to_perf_time':
> >> /mnt/ssd/ahunter/git/linux-perf/tools/perf/util/tsc.c:18: multiple definition of `tsc_to_perf_time'
> >> util/tsc.o:/mnt/ssd/ahunter/git/linux-perf/tools/perf/util/tsc.c:18: first defined here
> >> make[3]: *** [util/libperf-in.o] Error 1
> >> make[2]: *** [util] Error 2
> >> make[1]: *** [libperf-in.o] Error 2
> >> make: *** [all] Error 2
> >>
> >> I will have a look at why, unless Jiri knows?
> >>
> > 
> > I'm now testing attached patch, does it fix it for you?
> 
> Yup!  Thanks Jiri! :-)
> 

cool, I'll send it out soon..

Arnaldo,
the tarpkg test is failing on me because of removed export.h
not sure I missed attached update in your patch queue

jirka


---
diff --git a/tools/perf/MANIFEST b/tools/perf/MANIFEST
index d01a0aad5a01..4d16e8af18b7 100644
--- a/tools/perf/MANIFEST
+++ b/tools/perf/MANIFEST
@@ -40,7 +40,6 @@ tools/include/asm-generic/bitops.h
 tools/include/linux/atomic.h
 tools/include/linux/bitops.h
 tools/include/linux/compiler.h
-tools/include/linux/export.h
 tools/include/linux/hash.h
 tools/include/linux/kernel.h
 tools/include/linux/list.h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/