[PATCH] arm64: perf: fix syscalltbl path base
James Clark
james.clark at linaro.org
Mon Dec 15 02:52:24 PST 2025
On 15/12/2025 11:33, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2025, at 09:47, James Clark wrote:
>> On 15/12/2025 00:12, Joel May wrote:
>>
>> Hi Joel,
>>
>> There is a similar fix on the list here:
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-perf-users/20251204-perf_fix_syscall_header-v1-1-b8e27f74ed6a@arm.com/
>>
>> I'm not sure if commit 1 alone will also fix your issue, or we'd need to
>> collapse both of the commits in that set.
>>
>> The first commit has an older fixes: tag and also fixes some other
>> issues so it might be better to take that one rather than this one.
>
> I don't understand that other "fix", doesn't that just work around
> the arm64 build issue by adding another special case for arm64?
>
> If we want the tools directory to have a copy of the generated unistd.h
> files instead of generating them, it should at the minimum be done
> the same across all architectures.
>
> Arnd
I don't think it's a special case, the other architectures already have
a copy of their syscall headers in tools/ don't they?
My original commit that is reverted by Leo's patches is more of a "fix"
than his fix. It turned out that running the generator script for the
Perf build wasn't the best idea after all. Now it's obvious that we'd
have to keep injecting that build rule into every tool that needs it.
And it doesn't even respect this rule described here that tools headers
should be decoupled from the kernel sources:
linux/tools/include/uapi/README
I don't see the benefit of manually copying over the generator script
and its input file and then updating every build rule to invoke it when
we can manually copy over the output of that script and not have to do
anything else.
Ian makes the point that we can run the generator for doing
check_headers.sh. But at least that only needs to be done for one tool
and can be in addition to the manual copy.
James
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list