[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20151110.154035.1545699029296918207.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 15:40:35 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: rostedt@...dmis.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arnd@...db.de, mingo@...hat.com,
ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, xiakaixu@...wei.com,
hannes@...essinduktion.org, wangnan0@...wei.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, acme@...nel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf_trace: Make dependent on PERF_EVENTS
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 15:28:17 -0500
>
> Arnd Bergmann reported:
>
> In my ARM randconfig tests, I'm getting a build error for
> newly added code in bpf_perf_event_read and bpf_perf_event_output
> whenever CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS is disabled:
>
> kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c: In function 'bpf_perf_event_read':
> kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:203:11: error: 'struct perf_event' has no member named 'oncpu'
> if (event->oncpu != smp_processor_id() ||
> ^
> kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:204:11: error: 'struct perf_event' has no member named 'pmu'
> event->pmu->count)
>
> This can happen when UPROBE_EVENT is enabled but KPROBE_EVENT
> is disabled. I'm not sure if that is a configuration we care
> about, otherwise we could prevent this case from occuring by
> adding Kconfig dependencies.
>
> Looking at this further, it's really that UPROBE_EVENT enables PERF_EVENTS.
> By just having BPF_EVENTS depend on PERF_EVENTS, then all is fine.
>
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/4525348.Aq9YoXkChv@wuerfel
> Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
I'll apply this, thanks Steven et al.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists