On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 01:18:28PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the oprofile tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/oprofile/common.c between commit
> 38a81da2205f94e8a2a834b51a6b99c91fc7c2e8 ("perf events: Clean up pid
> passing") from the tip tree and commit
> 3d90a00763b51e1db344a7430c966be723b67a29 ("oprofile: Abstract the
> perf-events backend") from the oprofile tree.
>
> The latter moved the code modified by the former, so I used the version
> of this file from the oprofile tree. I also applied the effect of the
> tip tree patch to the new file drivers/oprofile/oprofile_perf.c:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/oprofile/oprofile_perf.c b/drivers/oprofile/oprofile_perf.c
> index b17235a..afbc43b 100644
> --- a/drivers/oprofile/oprofile_perf.c
> +++ b/drivers/oprofile/oprofile_perf.c
> @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ static int op_create_counter(int cpu, int event)
> return 0;
>
> pevent = perf_event_create_kernel_counter(&counter_config[event].attr,
> - cpu, -1,
> + cpu, NULL1,
> op_overflow_handler);
Is that a typo? Shouldn't that be NULL, and not NULL1?
--
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
