Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757881AbYHVTzy (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:55:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757498AbYHVTzc (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:55:32 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:4411 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755602AbYHVTzb (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:55:31 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 402 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:55:30 EDT Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:48:46 -0400 From: Jeff King To: =?utf-8?B?QmrDtnJu?= Steinbrink Cc: Andrew Morton , Petr Baudis , Alan.Brunelle@hp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.27-rc3: kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c - bisected Message-ID: <20080822194846.GA31356@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <48A36838.3050309@hp.com> <20080819124602.9e8e69f7.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <48AEDD3D.4060507@hp.com> <20080822092549.ddcb7e79.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080822171651.GP10544@machine.or.cz> <20080822105136.a8432875.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080822193730.GA1598@atjola.homenet> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20080822193730.GA1598@atjola.homenet> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1668 Lines: 45 On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 09:37:30PM +0200, Björn Steinbrink wrote: > Yep, and that's totally correct as far as bisect is concerned. The > parents of that merge commit are: > 88fa08f67bee1a0c765237bdac106a32872f57d2 > b1b135c8d619cb2c7045d6ee4e48375882518bb5 > > And Alan marked both of them as good. > > So, unless Alan made a mistake during his bisection, each of the > branches is correct, but the merge did not lead to a correct result. So > while there were no textual conflicts, there were still incompatible > changes regarding the code semantics and compatibility was not restored > during the merge. One thing that I have seen proposed (but never tried myself) is that you can linearize the changes using "rebase -i" (or cherry-picking), and then bisect that result. That is, given a history A-B-C-D \ / E-F where the merge "D" introduces the bug, you could try creating: A-B-C-E'-F' and bisecting that. And you should know that C is good from your previous bisection, but that F' probably is not, since it should be textually the same as D (unless, of course, you had textual conflicts during the rebase that you fixed up differently). So in essence you are testing each of E and F, but based on the other work. So you should be able to find the one patch that causes the conflict. And depending on the conflict, you may get more information by doing it the other way. I.e.,: A-E-F-B'-C' -Peff -- 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/