Re: Linux 2.6.25-rc4

[Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>]

On Monday 10 March 2008, Anders Eriksson wrote:
> 
> aeriksson@fastmail.fm said:
> > torvalds@linux-foundation.org said:
> >> I think we do want the bisect run here.
> >> My worry is that this is likely very timing-sensitive, so when it starts
> >> failing it might not be because of the commit that actually introduces the
> >> bug, but because some other timing changed, but with some luck that won't  
> >> be the case.
> 
> > I'm on it. Slow machine. Household's router, 4000 versions to go... 
> 
> The bisect came up with this:
> 
> 18a056feccabdfa9764016a615121b194828bc72 is first bad commit
> commit 18a056feccabdfa9764016a615121b194828bc72

Hmm, this is the first commit _after_ the previous "guilty"
commit 852738f39258deafb3d89c187cb1a4050820d555 so it just
can't be the "real bad" one...

> Author: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> Date:   Sat Jan 26 20:13:12 2008 +0100
> 
>     ide: don't enable local IRQs for PIO-in in driver_cmd_intr() (take 2)
> 
>     Don't enable local IRQs for PIO-in protocol in driver_cmd_intr().
> 
>     While at it:
> 
>     * Remove redundant rq->cmd_type check.
> 
>     * Read status register after enabling local IRQs for no-data protocol.
> 
>     v2:
>     * Re-add DRQ=1 check lost in v1 (noticed by Sergei).
> 
>     Acked-by: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com>
>     Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> 
> :040000 040000 5fb514a261b13494c5e9c035f9e7598276ce8839 0fda2eb7d96335061741d7f54ed3e05ca34ac5b8 M      drivers