[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160726063817.GA17368@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 08:38:17 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] perf changes for v4.8
* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Linus,
>
> On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 14:45:53 -0700 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > >
> > > Actually, the perf tree on its own was enough to trigger the build
> > > problem, the luto-next tree was just what initially triggered the build
> > > failure in linux-next (I guess there is some missing dependency).
> > > After the build failed, I started including the perf tree directly
> > > before the tip tree and the build would fail when I merged that ...
> >
> > Ugh. It's merged in my tree now, because I thought it was ok. Can
> > somebody point me to the fix?
>
> I only affects cross building of the objtool and vdso2c tools (which is
> how I work). The latest version of the perf/core branch in the tip
> tree now has all the fixes, so I assume that Ingo will send another
> pull request.
Yes, I'll send this ASAP.
> Unfortunately, that means that your tree is broken for me this
> morning ... but I will cope, I guess.
That's weird, I pushed out the fix from Arnaldo yesterday (about 8 hours ago)
which should merge fine with Linus's tree and make your tooling combination work.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists