Russell reported a number of warnings coming from sparse when
checking the ARM perf_event.c files:

| perf_event.c seems to also have problems too:
|
|   CHECK   arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c
|   arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c:37:1: warning: symbol 'pmu_lock' was not declared. Should it be static?
|   arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c:70:1: warning: symbol 'cpu_hw_events' was not declared. Should it be static?
|   arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c:1006:1: warning: symbol 'armv6pmu_enable_event' was not declared. Should it be static?
|   arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c:1113:1: warning: symbol 'armv6pmu_stop' was not declared. Should it be static?
|   arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c:1956:6: warning: symbol 'armv7pmu_enable_event' was not declared. Should it be static?
|   arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c:3072:14: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
|   arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c:3072:14:    expected void const volatile [noderef] <asn:1>*<noident>
|   arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c:3072:14:    got struct frame_tail *tail
|   arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c:3074:49: warning: incorrect type in argument 2 (different address spaces)
|   arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c:3074:49:    expected void const [noderef] <asn:1>*from
|   arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c:3074:49:    got struct frame_tail *tail

This patch resolves these issues so we can live in silence
again.
Reported-by: NRussell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: NWill Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: NRussell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>