[PATCH v2] perf: Fix build break on powerpc due to sample_reg_masks

From e29aeeee7236122c4d807ec9ebc721b5d7d75c8d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001

From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <redacted>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:53:49 -0400
Subject: [PATCH v2] perf: Fix build break on powerpc due to sample_reg_masks

perf_regs.c does not get built on Powerpc as CONFIG_PERF_REGS is false.
So the weak definition for 'sample_regs_masks' doesn't get picked up.

Adding perf_regs.o to util/Build unconditionally, exposes a redefinition
error for 'perf_reg_value()' function (due to the static inline version
in util/perf_regs.h). So use #ifdef HAVE_PERF_REGS_SUPPORT' around that
function.

Signed-off-by: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <redacted>
---
Changelog[v2]
	- [Jiri Olsa] include <linux/compiler.h> for __maybe_unused
---
 tools/perf/util/Build       | 2 +-
 tools/perf/util/perf_regs.c | 2 ++
 tools/perf/util/perf_regs.h | 1 +
 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/perf/util/Build b/tools/perf/util/Build
index 4bc7a9a..9217119 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/Build
+++ b/tools/perf/util/Build

@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ libperf-y += levenshtein.o
 libperf-y += llvm-utils.o
 libperf-y += parse-options.o
 libperf-y += parse-events.o
+libperf-y += perf_regs.o
 libperf-y += path.o
 libperf-y += rbtree.o
 libperf-y += bitmap.o

@@ -104,7 +105,6 @@ libperf-$(CONFIG_LIBBABELTRACE) += data-convert-bt.o
 
 libperf-y += scripting-engines/
 
-libperf-$(CONFIG_PERF_REGS) += perf_regs.o
 libperf-$(CONFIG_ZLIB) += zlib.o
 libperf-$(CONFIG_LZMA) += lzma.o
 

diff --git a/tools/perf/util/perf_regs.c b/tools/perf/util/perf_regs.c
index 885e8ac..6b8eb13 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/perf_regs.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/perf_regs.c

@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ const struct sample_reg __weak sample_reg_masks[] = {
 	SMPL_REG_END
 };
 
+#ifdef HAVE_PERF_REGS_SUPPORT
 int perf_reg_value(u64 *valp, struct regs_dump *regs, int id)
 {
 	int i, idx = 0;

@@ -29,3 +30,4 @@ out:
 	*valp = regs->cache_regs[id];
 	return 0;
 }
+#endif

diff --git a/tools/perf/util/perf_regs.h b/tools/perf/util/perf_regs.h
index 2984dcc..679d6e4 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/perf_regs.h
+++ b/tools/perf/util/perf_regs.h

@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
 #define __PERF_REGS_H
 
 #include <linux/types.h>
+#include <linux/compiler.h>
 
 struct regs_dump;
 

-- 
1.8.3.1

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:28:36AM -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:

From e29aeeee7236122c4d807ec9ebc721b5d7d75c8d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <redacted>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:53:49 -0400
Subject: [PATCH v2] perf: Fix build break on powerpc due to sample_reg_masks

perf_regs.c does not get built on Powerpc as CONFIG_PERF_REGS is false.
So the weak definition for 'sample_regs_masks' doesn't get picked up.

Adding perf_regs.o to util/Build unconditionally, exposes a redefinition
error for 'perf_reg_value()' function (due to the static inline version
in util/perf_regs.h). So use #ifdef HAVE_PERF_REGS_SUPPORT' around that
function.

Signed-off-by: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <redacted>

Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>

thanks,
jirka

Em Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 09:09:09PM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu:

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:28:36AM -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:

quoted

From e29aeeee7236122c4d807ec9ebc721b5d7d75c8d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <redacted>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:53:49 -0400
Subject: [PATCH v2] perf: Fix build break on powerpc due to sample_reg_masks

perf_regs.c does not get built on Powerpc as CONFIG_PERF_REGS is false.
So the weak definition for 'sample_regs_masks' doesn't get picked up.

Adding perf_regs.o to util/Build unconditionally, exposes a redefinition
error for 'perf_reg_value()' function (due to the static inline version
in util/perf_regs.h). So use #ifdef HAVE_PERF_REGS_SUPPORT' around that
function.

Signed-off-by: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <redacted>

Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>

Thanks, applied.

- Arnaldo

On Wed, 2015-09-30 at 16:45 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:

Em Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 09:09:09PM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu:

quoted

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:28:36AM -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:

quoted

From e29aeeee7236122c4d807ec9ebc721b5d7d75c8d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <redacted>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:53:49 -0400
Subject: [PATCH v2] perf: Fix build break on powerpc due to sample_reg_masks

perf_regs.c does not get built on Powerpc as CONFIG_PERF_REGS is false.
So the weak definition for 'sample_regs_masks' doesn't get picked up.

Adding perf_regs.o to util/Build unconditionally, exposes a redefinition
error for 'perf_reg_value()' function (due to the static inline version
in util/perf_regs.h). So use #ifdef HAVE_PERF_REGS_SUPPORT' around that
function.

Signed-off-by: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <redacted>

Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>

Thanks, applied.

Is this going to Linus' tree any time soon?

I have folks pinging me to say that perf is broken on powerpc.

cheers

Em Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 11:46:38AM +1100, Michael Ellerman escreveu:

On Wed, 2015-09-30 at 16:45 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:

quoted

Em Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 09:09:09PM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu:

quoted

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:28:36AM -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:

quoted

From e29aeeee7236122c4d807ec9ebc721b5d7d75c8d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <redacted>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:53:49 -0400
Subject: [PATCH v2] perf: Fix build break on powerpc due to sample_reg_masks

perf_regs.c does not get built on Powerpc as CONFIG_PERF_REGS is false.
So the weak definition for 'sample_regs_masks' doesn't get picked up.

Adding perf_regs.o to util/Build unconditionally, exposes a redefinition
error for 'perf_reg_value()' function (due to the static inline version
in util/perf_regs.h). So use #ifdef HAVE_PERF_REGS_SUPPORT' around that
function.

Signed-off-by: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <redacted>

Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>

Thanks, applied.

Is this going to Linus' tree any time soon?

I have folks pinging me to say that perf is broken on powerpc.

Checking this now.

- Arnaldo