Re: Re: pvops kernel branches - 2.6.36 options, stable/next/etc?

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>]

On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 12:20:25PM -0800, Bruce Edge wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Boris Derzhavets <bderzhavets@yahoo.com>wrote:
> 
> > Konrad,
> >
> > 2.6.35.8 (mainline) works as PV DomU kernel ( at Xen 4.0.1 Dom0)  with NFS
> > remote folder  with no issues. So,  2.6.35.8, 2.6.36 been built via upstream
> > source are OK. Seems  to be .37-rc1 bug
> >
> >
> I agree. I reinstalled a 2.6.36 domU and am unable to get it to crash using
> the same actions that reliably crashed the 2.6.37-rc1 domU.
> 
> Would it be worth bisecting the konrad-pcifront-2.6.32 branch to find which
> it started failing?

I think you meant another branch....but I don't believe the problem is related
to the pcifront. Boris was able to trigger this without using the XenPCI front.

It might make more sense to bisect from 2.6.36 through 2.6.36-rc1 timeframe.
During the merge window time when a lot of patches went in. It seems to point
to network since that is how you guys are triggering it..

> I think that 8029255fcc3a7925ad8ee9f5fdc0764b6662301e (on 10/24) was the
> last good sync that I got.

Ah, that would be the stable/xen-pcifront-0.8.1 tree. And it was based off
v2.6.36-rc7. There is also the stable/xen-pcifront-0.8.2 tree 
(5bba6c56dc99ff88f79a79572e29ecf445710878) - which for some mysterious
reasons on git.kernel.org was tracking the #master branch, so it ended up
pointing to stable/xen-pcifront-fixes.. I fixed it, but that one (xen-pcifront-0.8.2)
is based on v2.6.36-rc6, so even older (that was required as it was based on sparse_irq
rework).