From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Sun, 09 Mar 2008 09:44:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.168.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m29GiMrG003504 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2008 09:44:27 -0700 Received: from sandeen.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id DB2F6676D74 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2008 09:44:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id g53wLb2Av486Dcs4 for ; Sun, 09 Mar 2008 09:44:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <47D413FA.50602@sandeen.net> Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2008 11:44:42 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: 2.6.25-rc hangs References: <20080307224040.GV155259@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Christian Kujau Cc: David Chinner , LKML , xfs@oss.sgi.com Christian Kujau wrote: > On Sat, 8 Mar 2008, Christian Kujau wrote: >> FWIW, it's 100% reproducible with 2.6.25-rc3 too...sigh :-\ >> So, the last working kernel for me is 2.6.24.1 - that's a lot of bisecting >> and I fear that compile errors will invalidate the bisecting results again or >> make it impossible at all....I'll try anyway....tomorrow... > > Bisecting failed as expected :-( > I tried to follow the git-bisect manpage (and have successfully used > bisect in the past a few times), but I think ~5700 revisions between > 2.6.24 and 2.6.25 are just too much fuzz. The bisect logs so far, with > my comments inbetween: Christian, what is the test you are using for the bisect? Thanks, -Eric