From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756403Ab3ILSnt (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Sep 2013 14:43:49 -0400 Received: from mail-qc0-f171.google.com ([209.85.216.171]:59180 "EHLO mail-qc0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755182Ab3ILSnr (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Sep 2013 14:43:47 -0400 Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 15:43:41 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] perf fixes Message-ID: <20130912184341.GA11400@ghostprotocols.net> References: <20130912133855.GA23780@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Url: http://acmel.wordpress.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Em Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 11:10:37AM -0700, Linus Torvalds escreveu: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > When I compiled "perf" at the same time as doing a big kernel compile, > > the kernel compile failed > Oops. That may actually have been me being a bit *too* eager with a > "make allmodconfig" build. I can't reproduce it, and I'm starting to > suspect that I instead had two kernel compiles going, not one kernel > compile and a tools/perf/ compile. > "Yo Dawg, I heard you like kernel compiles, so I put a kernel > compile in your kernel compile so that you can compile the kernel > while you compile the kernel". :-) > But at least the "make install" problem is repeatable, though. Well, I just tried it, and the only thing that gets rebuilt are the CHK environment tests that try to figure out what can be built into perf, i.e. perl, python, libaudit, etc. Its something that annoys me as well, but not so much as to make me figure out how to make those be done only if some source file changed. But then, if you remove, say, libelf from your system so that you get a perf tool that uses just /proc/kallsyms, it wouldn't detect it... Perhaps in that case we should say: want a new build with a different environment? Do a 'make clean' first. But if I do it as a normal user and then try installing as root... it behaves like you described, duh :-\ Because of this: * new build flags or prefix Will check... - Arnaldo