Re: ppc32 MMCR0_PMXE saga.
Thomas Gleixner writes: > On Wed, 2005-02-02 at 23:47 -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > > I'm at a loss to explain whats been happening with this symbol. > > The macro was duplicated in -mm1. > I sent a patch against -mm1 > The patch went upstream without the perfctr-ppc.patch, which contained > the macro define in regs.h. > > So a bit of confusion came up The sane thing to do is to split -mm's perfctr-ppc.patch so that the new symbolic constants can go into -linus w/o having to drag in the experimental perfctr stuff from -mm. This wasn't an issue before because the -linus kernel didn't acquire any use of PMXE until very recently. /Mikael - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: ppc32 MMCR0_PMXE saga.
Mikael Pettersson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thomas Gleixner writes: > > On Wed, 2005-02-02 at 23:47 -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > > > I'm at a loss to explain whats been happening with this symbol. > > > > The macro was duplicated in -mm1. > > I sent a patch against -mm1 > > The patch went upstream without the perfctr-ppc.patch, which contained > > the macro define in regs.h. > > > > So a bit of confusion came up > > The sane thing to do is to split -mm's perfctr-ppc.patch so that > the new symbolic constants can go into -linus w/o having to drag > in the experimental perfctr stuff from -mm. ah, so that's what happened. I'll tweak perfctr-ppc.patch for now. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: ppc32 MMCR0_PMXE saga.
--- Dave Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > I'm at a loss to explain whats been happening with > this symbol. My patch was against the -mm series, as reported in the original subject. In the -mm series, the perfctr-ppc.patch already defines that symbol. As that patch contains all the perfctr related bits, it made sense to remove the definition coming from the Linus tree and keep the definition from the perfctr-ppc.patch. But just on -mm. Cheers, Albert __ Renovamos el Correo Yahoo!: ¡250 MB GRATIS! Nuevos servicios, más seguridad http://correo.yahoo.es - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: ppc32 MMCR0_PMXE saga.
On Wed, 2005-02-02 at 23:47 -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > I'm at a loss to explain whats been happening with this symbol. The macro was duplicated in -mm1. I sent a patch against -mm1 The patch went upstream without the perfctr-ppc.patch, which contained the macro define in regs.h. So a bit of confusion came up tglx - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
