On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:42:09 -0300 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[email protected]> wrote:
> Em Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 11:51:20AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier escreveu: > > On 16 June 2017 at 13:59, Kim Phillips <[email protected]> wrote: > > > -static int cs_device__print_file(const char *name, const char *fmt, ...) > > > __printf(2, 3) > > > +static int __printf(2, 3) cs_device__print_file(const char *name, const > > > char *fmt, ...) > > > { > > > va_list args; > > > FILE *file; > > > > I just tested Kim's solution on my side. > > > > Acked-by: Mathieu Poirier <[email protected]> > > Thanks for checking, since I haven't pushed this to Ingo I just squashed > Kim's fix into the buggy cset. > > Now I'm trying to build it with lots of cross build containers to see if > there are any other problems before push this up to Ingo. Thanks, I'm still trying to learn the submission process... Slightly off-topic, but when you push kernel.org/.../acme/linux.git, do you push --tags? If I do a fresh clone, checkout perf/core or urgent, build perf, PERF-VERSION-GEN first uses git to find the version number, then the Makefile. But in acme/linux.git, the latest version tag looks to match the master branch version: 3.2: so I get a 3.2-reporting version on what should be 4.12-rc4 (perf/core's current Makefile): $ tools/perf/perf --version perf version 3.2.gd15e591 Is this an acme/linux.git tree maintenance issue, or should PERF-VERSION-GEN be modified to compare versions gotten from git vs. the Makefile, and just use the higher one? Thanks, Kim
