From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.27-rc3: kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c - bisected Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:21:21 -0400 Message-ID: <20080822212121.GA31546@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <48A36838.3050309@hp.com> <20080819124602.9e8e69f7.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <48AEDD3D.4060507@hp.com> <20080822092549.ddcb7e79.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080822171651.GP10544@machine.or.cz> <20080822105136.a8432875.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <7v7ia8ahgu.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20080822141651.fe16ed99.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , pasky@suse.cz, Alan.Brunelle@hp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, git@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Morton X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Aug 22 23:22:31 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KWe5V-0001Fk-1O for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 23:22:29 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754957AbYHVVVY (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:21:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753203AbYHVVVY (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:21:24 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:1293 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751618AbYHVVVX (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:21:23 -0400 Received: (qmail 25432 invoked by uid 111); 22 Aug 2008 21:21:22 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with SMTP; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:21:22 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:21:21 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080822141651.fe16ed99.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 02:16:51PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > Sure, but > > a) whoever added a change like that without also causing the build to > break is slappable and Well, the point is to find out _who_ to slap. ;) > b) there are now two commits (one in each branch) either one of > which, when applied on top of the other branch will introduce the > regression. > > That's useful infomation, but we don't know how to get > git-bisect to give it to us. > > It's pretty simple. If git-bisect tells us that the regression was > introduced by a merge commit, we want to perform a bisection within > that merge's individual commits. I mentioned linearizing the two lines of development in another message in this thread. But there are, of course, two linearizations, neither of which might be possible to generate automatically, and one might give you a better answer than the other. -Peff