From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030781AbXDUMd6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Apr 2007 08:33:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030805AbXDUMd6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Apr 2007 08:33:58 -0400 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.175]:3655 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030781AbXDUMd5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Apr 2007 08:33:57 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=S3MO3e4YmP220gbIODd57zro2cvk2K8LZKcBcB4cha4zzyJSOUYDJZVUlG5UxBhVp4Ta9OaeHSZaIeqdRBtAwtwbjZTgnvXmlauhYM+9K2BkQR9QGqlAQP8ms1Js3txG/9pdi3B0s1whzLlXK+wTijWaub0S1mmXzhfO+1+2OU4= From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz To: Adrian Bunk Subject: Re: 2.6.20.7 locking up hard on boot Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 14:44:03 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 Cc: Greg KH , Marcos Pinto , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jan Beulich , Alan Cox , linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz References: <62eb359a0704201747ma376567kda671d6fa98b7409@mail.gmail.com> <20070421053420.GA10974@suse.de> <20070421103632.GC4016@stusta.de> In-Reply-To: <20070421103632.GC4016@stusta.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200704211444.03365.bzolnier@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 21 April 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:34:20PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 11:30:59PM -0500, Marcos Pinto wrote: > > > Yes, I just tried 2.6.20.3 with ACPI enabled and it booted perfectly. > > > I'm hoping this means you know what's wrong? :-) > > > > Can you do a 'git bisect' on the versions between 2.6.20.3 and 2.6.20.7 > > to try to find the problem patch? > > Considering where it failed and that 2.6.20.3 worked, I would be > extremely surprised if this wasn't one more report of > adjust-legacy-ide-resource-setting.patch breaking booting (and we > already have confirmed reports for this)... > > But AFAIK we still don't understand how this patch managed to break > things. Same here but 2.6.21 is near and we need to do something about this issue. I'm thinking about reverting this patch for 2.6.21-final - having broken X server is better than having broken and not booting kernel. Jan, Alan? Thanks, Bart