Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <5613166f-51f9-18f0-af52-b352aa67326c@huawei.com>
Date:   Fri, 30 Sep 2022 11:23:59 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.6.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf tools: Fix empty version number when building
 outside of a git repo
To:     Will Chandler <wfc@wfchandler.org>
CC:     <peterz@infradead.org>, <mingo@redhat.com>, <acme@kernel.org>,
        <mark.rutland@arm.com>, <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        <jolsa@kernel.org>, <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        <linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20220927195228.47304-1-wfc@wfchandler.org>
 <c5181877-2998-b952-abe6-26d733ae2aeb@huawei.com>
 <87A1F5B6-3F60-4988-8BA6-A993E5789C80@wfchandler.org>
 <2a4a15a4-55cd-f98b-4b14-474f24e2c308@huawei.com>
 <B89DF3DD-B07E-427F-8D4B-1F8251345A4C@wfchandler.org>
From:   John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <B89DF3DD-B07E-427F-8D4B-1F8251345A4C@wfchandler.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 29/09/2022 20:06, Will Chandler wrote:
> On 29 Sep 2022, at 6:09, John Garry wrote:
> 
>> Hmmm... maybe someone would want to customise PERF-VERSION-FILE for their own distro. Not sure. But then fiddling with PERF-VERSION-FILE might break the parsing so...I guess not.
> Yeah, seems like a bad idea. Doing a quick search, Void Linux does seem to be
> trying to set a custom version string in their build script[0], but I don't
> think passing PERF_VERSION as an argument to make has worked since 2013 with
> 3cecaa200227 ("perf tools: Do not include PERF-VERSION-FILE to Makefile, 2013-01-16").
> 
> [0]https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/blob/fdb3515c33f2bb997392ea6992e6bbb82c4376c5/srcpkgs/linux-tools/template#L56
> 
>> BTW, is there any other method of building the perf code not considered? So far I know:
>> a. in git tree
>> b. perf-tar-src-pkg
>> c. tarball
> Those are all that come to mind for me as well.
> 
> Let me know if you'd like me to re-roll the patch using the pre-7572733b8499
> approach.
> .

I have a slight preference that you do like pre-7572733b8499 if that is 
ok. The reason is that way was a bit more tried and tested.

Thanks,
John