linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/5] perf: Declare hw_perf_{dis,en}able() in perf

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1285859137.1628.4.camel@leonhard>
Date:	Fri, 01 Oct 2010 00:05:37 +0900
From:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] perf: Declare hw_perf_{dis,en}able() in
 perf_event.h

2010-09-30 (목), 13:22 +0200, Peter Zijlstra:
> On Mon, 2010-09-27 at 19:39 +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > Since they can be defined in arch-specific code declare them in
> > perf_event.h and remove following warnings from sparse:
> > 
> >  kernel/perf_event.c:83:13: warning: symbol 'hw_perf_disable' was not declared. Should it be static?
> >  kernel/perf_event.c:84:13: warning: symbol 'hw_perf_enable' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>
> 
> What tree is this against, those function no longer exist!?

That was Linus' tree. Sorry, I didn't check -tip tree.
Please ignore this :-(


-- 
Regards,
Namhyung Kim


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/