2.6.32-rc1-git2: Reported regressions from 2.6.31

2.6.32-rc1-git2: Reported regressions from 2.6.31

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

[Notes:

 * Here's the first summary report of known regressions from 2.6.31.  There's
   not too many of them at the moment, which is nice.

 * We're still getting quite a number of reports of regressions from 2.6.30 and
   it's been that way since 2.6.31 was released.  For details please see the
   summary report of regressions 2.6.30 -> 2.6.31 that will follow shortly.]

This message contains a list of some regressions from 2.6.31, for which there
are no fixes in the mainline I know of.  If any of them have been fixed already,
please let me know.

If you know of any other unresolved regressions from 2.6.31, please let me know
either and I'll add them to the list.  Also, please let me know if any of the
entries below are invalid.

Each entry from the list will be sent additionally in an automatic reply to
this message with CCs to the people involved in reporting and handling the
issue.


Listed regressions statistics:

  Date          Total  Pending  Unresolved
  ----------------------------------------
  2009-10-02       22       15           9


Unresolved regressions
----------------------

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14299
Subject		: oops in wireless, iwl3945 related?
Submitter	: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Date		: 2009-09-29 17:12 (3 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125424439725743&w=4


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14298
Subject		: warning at manage.c:361 (set_irq_wake), matrix-keypad related?
Submitter	: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Date		: 2009-09-30 20:07 (2 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125434130703538&w=4


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14297
Subject		: console resume broken since ba15ab0e8d
Submitter	: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
Date		: 2009-09-30 15:11 (2 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125432349404060&w=4


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14296
Subject		: spitz boots but suspend/resume is broken
Submitter	: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Date		: 2009-09-30 12:06 (2 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125431244516449&w=4


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14279
Subject		: Suspend to RAM freeze totally since 2.6.32-rc1
Submitter	: Christian Casteyde <casteyde.christian@free.fr>
Date		: 2009-09-30 18:14 (2 days old)


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14277
Subject		: Caught 8-bit read from freed memory in b43 driver at association
Submitter	: Christian Casteyde <casteyde.christian@free.fr>
Date		: 2009-09-30 18:06 (2 days old)


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14276
Subject		: nfsroot will not remount rw and claims illegal options
Submitter	: Hans de Bruin <bruinjm@xs4all.nl>
Date		: 2009-09-30 15:08 (2 days old)


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14260
Subject		: T400 suspend/resume regression
Submitter	: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
Date		: 2009-09-26 6:57 (6 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125394827806011&w=4
Handled-By	: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14214
Subject		: BUG at drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c:1108!
Submitter	: Plamen Petrov <pvp-lsts@fs.ru.acad.bg>
Date		: 2009-09-23 11:13 (9 days old)


Regressions with patches
------------------------

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14302
Subject		: Kernel panic on i386 machine when booting with profile=2
Submitter	: Shi, Alex <alex.shi@intel.com>
Date		: 2009-10-01 3:23 (1 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125436749607199&w=4
Handled-By	: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/50813/


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14300
Subject		: BUG_ON crash w/ ext4
Submitter	: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de>
Date		: 2009-10-01 1:41 (1 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125436130800340&w=4
		  http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125436568504914&w=4
Handled-By	: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/50810/


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14278
Subject		: New message "NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 08" at each ping request
Submitter	: Christian Casteyde <casteyde.christian@free.fr>
Date		: 2009-09-30 18:12 (2 days old)
Handled-By	: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>
Patch		: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=23220


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14271
Subject		: ACPI boot memory leaks
Submitter	: Zdenek Kabelac <zdenek.kabelac@gmail.com>
Date		: 2009-09-29 9:18 (3 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125421594111690&w=4
Handled-By	: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/50565/


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14259
Subject		: NFS problem with past 2.6.31 git tree
Submitter	: Zdenek Kabelac <zdenek.kabelac@gmail.com>
Date		: 2009-09-25 15:12 (7 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125389156504570&w=4
Handled-By	: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/50428/


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14247
Subject		: ACPI Exception: AE_TIME, Returned by Handler for [EmbeddedControl] flooding logs
Submitter	: Thomas Backlund <tmb@mandriva.org>
Date		: 2009-09-25 15:08 (7 days old)
References	: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/9/25/121
Handled-By	: Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@suse.de>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/50516/


For details, please visit the bug entries and follow the links given in
references.

As you can see, there is a Bugzilla entry for each of the listed regressions.
There also is a Bugzilla entry used for tracking the regressions from 2.6.31,
unresolved as well as resolved, at:

http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14230

Please let me know if there are any Bugzilla entries that should be added to
the list in there.

Thanks,
Rafael

Re: 2.6.32-rc1-git2: Reported regressions from 2.6.31

[James Bottomley]

On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 21:26 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14214
> Subject         : BUG at drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c:1108!
> Submitter       : Plamen Petrov <pvp-lsts-Xdw7EbNJKi3354cJYj5R/Q@public.gmane.org>
> Date            : 2009-09-23 11:13 (9 days old)

This one is fixed (as confirmed by the bug report).

James

Re: 2.6.32-rc1-git2: Reported regressions from 2.6.31

[Jaswinder Singh Rajput]

Hello Rafael,

On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 21:26 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> [Notes:
> 
>  * Here's the first summary report of known regressions from 2.6.31.  There's
>    not too many of them at the moment, which is nice.
> 
>  * We're still getting quite a number of reports of regressions from 2.6.30 and
>    it's been that way since 2.6.31 was released.  For details please see the
>    summary report of regressions 2.6.30 -> 2.6.31 that will follow shortly.]
> 
> This message contains a list of some regressions from 2.6.31, for which there
> are no fixes in the mainline I know of.  If any of them have been fixed already,
> please let me know.
> 
> If you know of any other unresolved regressions from 2.6.31, please let me know
> either and I'll add them to the list.  Also, please let me know if any of the
> entries below are invalid.
> 
> Each entry from the list will be sent additionally in an automatic reply to
> this message with CCs to the people involved in reporting and handling the
> issue.
> 
> 
> Listed regressions statistics:
> 
>   Date          Total  Pending  Unresolved
>   ----------------------------------------
>   2009-10-02       22       15           9
> 
> 
> Unresolved regressions
> ----------------------
> 
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14299
> Subject		: oops in wireless, iwl3945 related?
> Submitter	: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
> Date		: 2009-09-29 17:12 (3 days old)
> References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125424439725743&w=4
> 

If you add one more entry say "Suspected commit :" then it will be great
and will solve regressions much faster. You can request submitter to
submit 'suspected commit' by git bisect and also specify git bisect
links like : (for more information about git bisect check
http://kerneltrap.org/node/11753)

Thanks,
--
JSR

Re: 2.6.32-rc1-git2: Reported regressions from 2.6.31

[Stefan Richter]

Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> If you add one more entry say "Suspected commit :" then it will be great
> and will solve regressions much faster.

Will?  Might.

> You can request submitter to
> submit 'suspected commit' by git bisect and also specify git bisect
> links like : (for more information about git bisect check
> http://kerneltrap.org/node/11753)

I disagree.  A reporter should only be asked to bisect (using git or
other tools) /if/ a developer determined that bisection may speed up the
debugging process or is the only remaining option to make progress with
a bug.

It would be wrong to steal a reporter's valuable time by asking for
bisection before anybody familiar with the matter even had a first look
at the report.

Remember:
  - Not all bugs can be economically narrowed down by bisection.
  - Bisection requires skills, rigor, and time.
  - Alas there are considerable sections in our kernel history which
    are not bisectable.
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--= =-=- ---=-
http://arcgraph.de/sr/

Re: 2.6.32-rc1-git2: Reported regressions from 2.6.31

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Friday 02 October 2009, Stefan Richter wrote:
> Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > If you add one more entry say "Suspected commit :" then it will be great
> > and will solve regressions much faster.
> 
> Will?  Might.

In fact I add the "First-Bad-Commit" annotation where there is a bisection
result or it's possible to fix things by reverting a specific commit.

> > You can request submitter to
> > submit 'suspected commit' by git bisect and also specify git bisect
> > links like : (for more information about git bisect check
> > http://kerneltrap.org/node/11753)
> 
> I disagree.  A reporter should only be asked to bisect (using git or
> other tools) /if/ a developer determined that bisection may speed up the
> debugging process or is the only remaining option to make progress with
> a bug.
> 
> It would be wrong to steal a reporter's valuable time by asking for
> bisection before anybody familiar with the matter even had a first look
> at the report.

Agreed.

Thanks,
Rafael