On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 09:35:34PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Randy Dunlap <rdun...@xenotime.net> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 16:25:42 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> >
> > xen has lots of build errors and warnings (all on x86_64).
Hm, I have a fix in my linux-next (and stable/bug.fixes) for this that I was
thinking
to send in a couple of days ..
commit 1e9ea2656b656edd3c8de98675bbc0340211b5bd
Author: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jer...@goop.org>
Date: Wed Aug 3 09:43:44 2011 -0700
xen/tracing: it looks like we wanted CONFIG_FTRACE
Apparently we wanted CONFIG_FTRACE rather the CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER.
Reported-by: Sander Eikelenboom <li...@eikelenboom.it>
Tested-by: Sander Eikelenboom <li...@eikelenboom.it>
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardi...@citrix.com>
Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.w...@oracle.com>
diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/Makefile b/arch/x86/xen/Makefile
index 45e94ac..3326204 100644
--- a/arch/x86/xen/Makefile
+++ b/arch/x86/xen/Makefile
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ obj-y := enlighten.o setup.o multicalls.o mmu.o irq.o
\
grant-table.o suspend.o platform-pci-unplug.o \
p2m.o
-obj-$(CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER) += trace.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_FTRACE) += trace.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += smp.o
obj-$(CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS)+= spinlock.o
.. snip of the long compile error..
> These build failures are still triggering upstream:
>
> arch/x86/xen/trace.c:44:2: error: array index in initializer not of integer
> type
> arch/x86/xen/trace.c:44:2: error: (near initialization for
> ‘xen_hypercall_names’)
> arch/x86/xen/trace.c:45:1: error: ‘__HYPERVISOR_arch_4’ undeclared here (not
> in a function)
> arch/x86/xen/trace.c:45:2: error: array index in initializer not of integer
> type
> arch/x86/xen/trace.c:45:2: error: (near initialization for
> ‘xen_hypercall_names’)
Oh, that I haven't seen. Can you send me the .config for that please.
>
> even after:
>
> b3c4b9825075: xen/tracing: fix compile errors when tracing is disabled.
>
> Btw., that the heck is going on with the commit that introduced the
> build failure:
>
> commit bd9ddc875b6659f9f74dcfd285c472bc58041abd
> Author: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardi...@citrix.com>
> AuthorDate: Mon Jun 20 17:52:13 2011 -0700
> Commit: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardi...@citrix.com>
> CommitDate: Mon Jul 18 15:43:46 2011 -0700
>
> It was apparently rebased shortly before the merge window and sent to
Well, the rebase I get - it was done on top of the merge that introduced
the new functionality.
> Linus 3 days later, with little to no linux-next testing ...
<Hmm> It did fix the compile problem.. albeit it created another one.
>
> I'm absolutely unhappy about how the Xen tree is being run. It's
> using a sloppy, crappy workflow and it is producing crap.
Do you have a manual of how you guys run your workflow?
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
