From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757196AbZDGD4q (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Apr 2009 23:56:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754093AbZDGD4c (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Apr 2009 23:56:32 -0400 Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com ([209.85.200.171]:63442 "EHLO wf-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753014AbZDGD43 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Apr 2009 23:56:29 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=DO2Ok0+O2/eYqUPRgG9EZzwekAHYRbrq4IdA7orcj+0PWnbSh096eO9fi/TzPzZvsN bmOAWb5crTL1V6k+j+NaP3otbDbxB9Ma8jfO0TzZLT1gvlyIjlTi36EKk7VgYk8xH5a2 4GqBgtKkkKn9UfAfoin2gRwYjU0BsgjW5Q3wg= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 21:56:27 -0600 Message-ID: <9b1675090904062056v235af58ehc99cce8ff97fe501@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: 2.6.29-git13: Reported regressions from 2.6.28 From: "Trenton D. Adams" To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Adrian Bunk , Andrew Morton , Natalie Protasevich , Kernel Testers List , Network Development , Linux ACPI , Linux PM List , Linux SCSI List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> >> Bug-Entry     : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13018 >> Subject               : 2.6.29 on MacBook 2,1 fails to reboot >> Submitter     : Trenton Adams >> Date          : 2009-03-30 2:04 (8 days old) >> References    : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123837870307249&w=4 >> Handled-By    : "Morten P.D. Stevens" > > This went through bisection, but looking at the email log, I tend to > suspect that maybe Trenton marked some versions good even though they > weren't (because they got versions numbers from v2.6.27), and didn't > realize that that messes up bisection in a big way. Is it appropriate for me to respond to these things? I was wondering about that. Someone had mentioned that I should trust the bisect, even when it takes me into "other versions", and it was taking me through 2.6.27, which I thought was just really weird. Would you like me to try the bisect again with a little more diligence, or do you think it can be found with the info given? It may take a week or so, due to being a bit busy. Thanks