Re: help with git bisecting a bug 16376: random - possibly Radeon DRM KMS related - freezes

[Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1766 bytes --]

Am Freitag 10 September 2010 schrieb Florian Mickler:
> On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 16:18:49 +0200
> 
> Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de> wrote:
> > Yes, I am aware that it may not be a Ext4 problem at all. Thus I said
> > Ext4 / readahead related (!) backtrace (! not bug) cause that was
> > all I could see on the screen. How else should I have described that
> > backtrace when I can't speculate on what I can not see?
> 
> I think, it is no big thing. The trick is probably to say nothing at
> all about the cause, when it is not clear. It's a mind thing. As soon
> as the association is brought up, everybody thinks along those lines. 
> :)
> 
> If you leave out the "ext4/readahead related", then people will still
> know that it might be ext4 readahead related because you posted the
> backtrace, but they will not have their mind turned to that. Instead
> they will think: oh a backtrace... there were some people shouting
> about backtraces in my area, let's see if it is realted.

OTOH I thought when I put in some keywords from the backtrace in my query 
it might get the attention of the right people. When I just say unknown 
backtrace, then I am adressing no one.

> But of course, sometimes putting blame somewhere also does help getting
> attention. After all "CORRUPTION IN FILESYSTEM XYZ" sticks out more
> than "partial trace of a thing i don't know anything at all".

I wouldn't do that for sensational purposes.

Maybe next time: "Fails to boot with partially shown backtrace, with some 
ext4 / readahead function calls inside it"? Or even more general some I/O 
/ filesystem related functions?

-- 
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA  B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]