Hello Ingo,
On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 01:05:12PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the tracing tree got a conflict in
> > arch/parisc/include/asm/ftrace.h between commit
> > d75f054a2cf0614ff63d534ff21ca8eaab41e713 ("parisc: add ftrace (function
> > and graph tracer) functionality") from the parisc tree and commit
> > c79a61f55773d2519fd0525bf58385f7d20752d3 ("tracing: make CALLER_ADDRx
> > overwriteable") from the tracing tree.
> >
> > The former adds a non-trivial version of the file, so I used that.
>
> You need to be careful, the two trees likely cannot be combined like
> that, ftrace will likely stop working on parisc because you combine
> old-parisc with new-ftrace.
>
> If the two trees are integrated without forward-porting the parisc
> ftrace port to the new facilities, then it's safer to do a trivial
> patch that disables the ftrace bits on parisc.
I'm not sure that they really conflict. My change ("tracing: make
CALLER_ADDRx overwriteable") only created the empty include file that I
can unconditionally include <asm/ftrace.h>.
But I don't know for sure.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
