From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christian Couder Subject: Re: AAARGH bisection is hard (Re: [2.6.39 regression] X locks up hard right after logging in) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 10:20:54 +0200 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, git@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Shuang He To: Andrew Lutomirski Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 7:15 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote= : > > OK, this sucks. =A0In the course of bisecting this, I've hit two othe= r > apparently unrelated bugs that prevent my from testing large numbers > of kernels. =A0Do I have two questions: > > 1. Anyone have any ideas from looking at the log? > > It looks like most of what's left is network code, so cc netdev. > > 2. =A0The !&$#@ bisection is skipping all over the place. =A0I've see= n > 2.6.37 versions and all manner of -rc's out of order. =A0Linus, and > other people who like pontificating about git bisection: is there any > way to get the bisection to follow Linus' tree? =A0I think that if > bisect could be persuaded to consider only changes that are reached b= y > following only the *first* merge parent all the way from the bad > revision to the good revision, then the bisection would build version= s > that were at least good enough for Linus to pull and might have fewer > bisection-killing bugs. > > (This isn't a new idea [1], and git rev-list --bisect --first-parent > isn't so bad except that it doesn't bisect.) Did you forget to put the reference [1] in your email? Was it this one you were thinking about: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/165433/ ? Thanks, Christian.