From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757378AbYG0Dus (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2008 23:50:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755376AbYG0Duk (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2008 23:50:40 -0400 Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com ([171.71.176.70]:23397 "EHLO sj-iport-1.cisco.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754496AbYG0Duj (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2008 23:50:39 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.31,257,1215388800"; d="scan'208";a="58095695" From: Roland Dreier To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara , Al Viro Subject: Re: 2.6.26-mmotm-0724 - linux-next.git loses /proc/sys/fs/quota, breaks disk quotas References: <14615.1217125366@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <20080726202525.3ac3052f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <21657.1217130229@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> X-Message-Flag: Warning: May contain useful information Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 20:50:37 -0700 In-Reply-To: <21657.1217130229@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> (Valdis Kletnieks's message of "Sat, 26 Jul 2008 23:43:49 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Jul 2008 03:50:37.0837 (UTC) FILETIME=[EE611BD0:01C8EF9B] Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-2; header.From=rdreier@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim2002 verified; ); Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I've bisected through Linus' tree more than once - ISTR that there was > some special funkiness in dealing with trying to bisect through linux-next > because the tree gets redone every night. > If it *was* as easy as Linus's tree to bisect, I'd go ahead and do it. For a single day's linux-next tree, it should be just like Linus's tree... just clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git and bisect as usual. The funkiness is that if you say, "linux-next from July 24 worked, linux-next from July 25 didn't," then it's pretty much hopeless, exactly because those two trees were built independently. - R.