From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753481AbdJSSmk (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Oct 2017 14:42:40 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-f194.google.com ([209.85.223.194]:45707 "EHLO mail-io0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753104AbdJSSmh (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Oct 2017 14:42:37 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+QnxeUQoPxTDkSnAATwilzVIYGQKOVcHoqVdSnCCgxxzbLvx1xqZdChJP2QIIqrDUPbsrdC9VdhtLhHhDciML0= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171019083230.2450779-1-arnd@arndb.de> References: <20171019083230.2450779-1-arnd@arndb.de> From: Joel Fernandes Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 11:42:34 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: always define trace_{irq,preempt}_{enable_disable} To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 1:32 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > We get a build error in the irqsoff tracer in some configurations: > > kernel/trace/trace_irqsoff.c: In function 'trace_preempt_on': > kernel/trace/trace_irqsoff.c:855:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'trace_preempt_enable_rcuidle'; did you mean 'trace_irq_enable_rcuidle'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > trace_preempt_enable_rcuidle(a0, a1); > > The problem is that trace_preempt_enable_rcuidle() has different > definition based on multiple Kconfig symbols, but not all combinations > have a valid definition. > > This changes the conditions so that we always get exactly one > definition of each of the four tracing macros. I have not tried > to verify that these definitions are sensible, but now we > can build all randconfig combinations again. > > Fixes: d59158162e03 ("tracing: Add support for preempt and irq enable/disable events") > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann Yes this build condition is possible. Thanks for finding it. I agree with this patch, I will be simplifying this much more once I integrate PROVE_LOCKING to use tracepoint probes but this is Ok with me for now. Acked-by: Joel Fernandes thanks! - Joel