Hi all,
After merging the arm-perf tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/ampere_cspmu.c: In function 'ampere_cspmu_set_ev_filter':
drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/ampere_cspmu.c:164:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'writel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
164 | writel(threshold, cspmu->base0 + PMAUXR0);
| ^~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Caused by commit
290a9c0e55f8 ("perf: arm_cspmu: ampere_cspmu: Add support for Ampere SoC PMU")
I have used the arm-perf tree from next-20231009 for today.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Hi Stephen,
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the arm-perf tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/ampere_cspmu.c: In function 'ampere_cspmu_set_ev_filter':
> drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/ampere_cspmu.c:164:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'writel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 164 | writel(threshold, cspmu->base0 + PMAUXR0);
> | ^~~~~~
> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>
> Caused by commit
>
> 290a9c0e55f8 ("perf: arm_cspmu: ampere_cspmu: Add support for Ampere SoC PMU")
>
> I have used the arm-perf tree from next-20231009 for today.
Thanks for catching the bug! It doesn't seem to happen on arm64 build but
I can reproduce it on x86_64 build indeed.
Will, it seems that "#include <linux/io.h>" is missing from
ampere_cspmu.c. After that also x86_64 build goes through. How would you
like to get the bug fixed? Shall I submit a new version of the patch, and
you would replace the old patch with the new one or is it better to
create a completely new patch that only adds the missing include line?
Cheers, Ilkka
On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 10:45:18PM -0700, Ilkka Koskinen wrote:
>
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On Mon, 9 Oct 2023, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After merging the arm-perf tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/ampere_cspmu.c: In function 'ampere_cspmu_set_ev_filter':
> > drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/ampere_cspmu.c:164:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'writel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > 164 | writel(threshold, cspmu->base0 + PMAUXR0);
> > | ^~~~~~
> > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> >
> > Caused by commit
> >
> > 290a9c0e55f8 ("perf: arm_cspmu: ampere_cspmu: Add support for Ampere SoC PMU")
> >
> > I have used the arm-perf tree from next-20231009 for today.
>
> Thanks for catching the bug! It doesn't seem to happen on arm64 build but I
> can reproduce it on x86_64 build indeed.
>
>
> Will, it seems that "#include <linux/io.h>" is missing from ampere_cspmu.c.
> After that also x86_64 build goes through. How would you like to get the bug
> fixed? Shall I submit a new version of the patch, and you would replace the
> old patch with the new one or is it better to
> create a completely new patch that only adds the missing include line?
If it's just a missing include, I can chuck a patch on top to fix it myself.
I'll double-check it resolves the problem and then update the branch.
Thanks!
Will
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 06:50:13PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 10:45:18PM -0700, Ilkka Koskinen wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Oct 2023, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > After merging the arm-perf tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > >
> > > drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/ampere_cspmu.c: In function 'ampere_cspmu_set_ev_filter':
> > > drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/ampere_cspmu.c:164:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'writel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > 164 | writel(threshold, cspmu->base0 + PMAUXR0);
> > > | ^~~~~~
> > > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> > >
> > > Caused by commit
> > >
> > > 290a9c0e55f8 ("perf: arm_cspmu: ampere_cspmu: Add support for Ampere SoC PMU")
> > >
> > > I have used the arm-perf tree from next-20231009 for today.
> >
> > Thanks for catching the bug! It doesn't seem to happen on arm64 build but I
> > can reproduce it on x86_64 build indeed.
> >
> >
> > Will, it seems that "#include <linux/io.h>" is missing from ampere_cspmu.c.
> > After that also x86_64 build goes through. How would you like to get the bug
> > fixed? Shall I submit a new version of the patch, and you would replace the
> > old patch with the new one or is it better to
> > create a completely new patch that only adds the missing include line?
>
> If it's just a missing include, I can chuck a patch on top to fix it myself.
> I'll double-check it resolves the problem and then update the branch.
In the end I just fixed up your commit, as it was still on the HEAD of the
branch. Update now pushed out!
Cheers,
Will
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 06:50:13PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 10:45:18PM -0700, Ilkka Koskinen wrote:
>>> On Mon, 9 Oct 2023, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>>> After merging the arm-perf tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
>>>> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>>>>
>>>> drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/ampere_cspmu.c: In function 'ampere_cspmu_set_ev_filter':
>>>> drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/ampere_cspmu.c:164:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'writel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> 164 | writel(threshold, cspmu->base0 + PMAUXR0);
>>>> | ^~~~~~
>>>> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>>>>
>>>> Caused by commit
>>>>
>>>> 290a9c0e55f8 ("perf: arm_cspmu: ampere_cspmu: Add support for Ampere SoC PMU")
>>>>
>>>> I have used the arm-perf tree from next-20231009 for today.
>>>
>>> Thanks for catching the bug! It doesn't seem to happen on arm64 build but I
>>> can reproduce it on x86_64 build indeed.
>>>
>>>
>>> Will, it seems that "#include <linux/io.h>" is missing from ampere_cspmu.c.
>>> After that also x86_64 build goes through. How would you like to get the bug
>>> fixed? Shall I submit a new version of the patch, and you would replace the
>>> old patch with the new one or is it better to
>>> create a completely new patch that only adds the missing include line?
>>
>> If it's just a missing include, I can chuck a patch on top to fix it myself.
>> I'll double-check it resolves the problem and then update the branch.
>
> In the end I just fixed up your commit, as it was still on the HEAD of the
> branch. Update now pushed out!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Will
Sounds perfect! Thank you Will, much appreciated!
Cheers, Ilkka