Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751220AbWBUXiK (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 18:38:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751222AbWBUXiJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 18:38:09 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:64966 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751220AbWBUXiI (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 18:38:08 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 15:33:05 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Kay Sievers Cc: penberg@cs.helsinki.fi, gregkh@suse.de, bunk@stusta.de, rml@novell.com, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, johnstul@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: 2.6.16-rc4: known regressions Message-Id: <20060221153305.5d0b123f.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20060221225718.GA12480@vrfy.org> References: <20060217231444.GM4422@stusta.de> <84144f020602190306o3149d51by82b8ccc6108af012@mail.gmail.com> <20060219145442.GA4971@stusta.de> <1140383653.11403.8.camel@localhost> <20060220010205.GB22738@suse.de> <1140562261.11278.6.camel@localhost> <20060221225718.GA12480@vrfy.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1432 Lines: 38 Kay Sievers wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 12:51:01AM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 17:02 -0800, Greg KH wrote: > > > If you revert this one patch, on top of a clean 2.6.16-rc4, do things > > > start working for you again? > > > > Okey dokey, bisecting with mrproper took little longer than expected but > > I found the bad changeset: Thanks - it helps heaps. > > 033b96fd30db52a710d97b06f87d16fc59fee0f1 is first bad commit > > diff-tree 033b96fd30db52a710d97b06f87d16fc59fee0f1 (from 0f76e5acf9dc788e664056dda1e461f0bec93948) > > Author: Kay Sievers > > Date: Fri Nov 11 06:09:55 2005 +0100 > > > > [PATCH] remove mount/umount uevents from superblock handling > > Upgrade HAL, it's too old for that kernel. > We broke back-compatibility. The changelog _failed to tell us_ that we were breaking back-compatibility. The patch wouldn't have been applied if we'd been told that. At least, not without a lot of careful thought. The fact that the changelog failed to tell us this makes one suspect that the breakage was inadvertent. So no, upgrading HAL is not a good answer. Please fix the kernel. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/