From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz [195.113.26.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3sZYSc2xStzDsXL for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 19:45:52 +1000 (AEST) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 11:37:56 +0200 From: Pavel Machek To: Thorsten Leemhuis Cc: Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Jonathan Corbet Subject: Re: Linux 4.8: Reported regressions as of Sunday, 2016-08-28 Message-ID: <20160915093756.GB13132@amd> References: <3b3d733e-f193-b039-6113-6c0e5b44c4e7@leemhuis.info> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <3b3d733e-f193-b039-6113-6c0e5b44c4e7@leemhuis.info> List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi! > Hi! Here is my second regression report for Linux 4.8. It lists 11 > regressions. 5 of them are new; 5 mentioned in the last report two > weeks ago got fixed. > > FWIW: A small detail: I did not include "Regression - SATA disks behind > USB ones on v4.8-rc1, breaking boot. [Re: Who reordered my disks]" > (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg144871.html ) in below list > report. The discussion mentions that device names like /dev/sd? are not > considered stable as they might change depending on various factors -- > like the order in which modules are loaded or other timing issues (like > in this case). That is how it is afaik (even if it's not well known), > and that's why I didn't include the issue; let me know if you think it > should be on the list. > > OTOH I included "Commit cb4f71c429 deliberately changes order of > network interfaces" (http://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2325600.html ) > for now, as I think traditional network interface names (eth0, eth1, ...) > might be considered stable -- but I'm not sure, that's why I raise it > here. > > Anyway, you know the drill: Are you aware of any other regressions? > Then please let me know. And tell me if there is anything in the > report that shouldn't be there. > > Ciao, Thorsten > > P.S.: Thanks to all those that Aaro Koskinen, Hans de Goede, Pavel > Machek for CCing me when reporting regressions. Much appreciated! Ohh, > and thx to all those that replied when I asked them for status updates > when things look stuck. Hmm, and there's one more apparently. See Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 22:38:45 +0200 From: Martin Steigerwald To: Pavel Machek Cc: kernel list , daniel.vetter@intel.com, jani.nikula@linux.intel.com, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: 4.8-rc1: it is now common that machine needs re-run of xrandr after resume User-Agent: KMail/5.2.3 (Linux/4.8.0-rc6-tp520-btrfstrim+; KDE/5.25.0; x86_64; ; ) I'm glad I'm not the only one seeing it, but I don't have idea how to actually debug it. Thanks and best regards, Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html