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-parisc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html