Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the perf tree got a conflict in:

  tools/perf/util/syscalltbl.c

between commit:

  5d35634ecc2d ("perf trace: Fix non-listed archs in the syscalltbl routines")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  8c0d1202bad3 ("perf, riscv: Wire up perf trace support for RISC-V")

from the perf tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc tools/perf/util/syscalltbl.c
index 6c45ded922b6,349986f6e5f5..000000000000
--- a/tools/perf/util/syscalltbl.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/syscalltbl.c
@@@ -46,11 -46,10 +46,15 @@@ static const char *const *syscalltbl_na
  #include <asm/syscalls.c>
  const int syscalltbl_native_max_id = SYSCALLTBL_LOONGARCH_MAX_ID;
  static const char *const *syscalltbl_native = syscalltbl_loongarch;
+ #elif defined(__riscv)
+ #include <asm/syscalls.c>
+ const int syscalltbl_native_max_id = SYSCALLTBL_RISCV_MAX_ID;
+ static const char *const *syscalltbl_native = syscalltbl_riscv;
 +#else
 +const int syscalltbl_native_max_id = 0;
 +static const char *const syscalltbl_native[] = {
 +	[0] = "unknown",
 +};
  #endif
  
  struct syscall {

Hello,

On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 10:33:45AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the perf tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   tools/perf/util/syscalltbl.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   5d35634ecc2d ("perf trace: Fix non-listed archs in the syscalltbl routines")
> 
> from Linus' tree and commit:
> 
>   8c0d1202bad3 ("perf, riscv: Wire up perf trace support for RISC-V")
> 
> from the perf tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.

Thanks for reporting this.  I expected the conflict when I applied the
RISC-V change and now I've merged the perf-tools branch into the
perf-tools-next with the resolution like yours.  So it won't hit the
mainline tree.

Thanks,
Namhyung