Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756181AbZCQPmB (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2009 11:42:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754276AbZCQPlt (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2009 11:41:49 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:47642 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754279AbZCQPls (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2009 11:41:48 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:39:24 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: "John W. Linville" Cc: Jeff Chua , Linus Torvalds , Johannes Berg , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Adrian Bunk , Andrew Morton , Kernel Testers List , Network Development Subject: Re: 2.6.29-rc8: Reported regressions from 2.6.28 Message-ID: <20090317153924.GA21061@elte.hu> References: <1237140665.24621.2.camel@johannes.local> <1237143683.24621.7.camel@johannes.local> <20090315202603.GA9077@elte.hu> <20090317144802.GF3549@tuxdriver.com> <20090317152801.GA6737@tuxdriver.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090317152801.GA6737@tuxdriver.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1991 Lines: 46 * John W. Linville wrote: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 10:48:02AM -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 07:55:49AM +0800, Jeff Chua wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 3:57 AM, Linus Torvalds > > > wrote: > > > > > > > IOW, if you've pinpointed 71c11fb57b924c160297ccd9e1761db598d00ac2 as > > > > being bad, then you should go back and double-check that its parent > > > > (in this case 4607816f608b42a5379aca97ceed08378804c99f) is good. > > > > Because if it's parent is also bad, then that just means that you made > > > > some mistake in "git bisect". > > > > In this case, it really sounds like maybe you marked the parent good, even > > > > though you should have marked it bad. > > > > > > I should have been more careful, just got thrown off during the last > > > few steps of the bisect. But with the bad association to the AP after > > > a57a59f247b651e8ed6d3eeb7e2f9d83b83134c9 (iwlwifi: remove implicit > > > direct scan), can someone suggest where to go from here? > > > > The obvious question for me is did you try this? > > > > git revert a57a59f247b651e8ed6d3eeb7e2f9d83b83134c9 > > Hmmm...more like this: > > git revert 41bb73eeac5ff5fb217257ba33b654747b3abf11 > git revert b23f99bcfa12c7b452f7ad201ea5921534d4e9ff > git revert 71c11fb57b924c160297ccd9e1761db598d00ac2 > git revert 4607816f608b42a5379aca97ceed08378804c99f > git revert a57a59f247b651e8ed6d3eeb7e2f9d83b83134c9 > > This first one has a conflict -- just take the hunk. Since you apparently have done this sequence and have resolved the conflict (which is hard to do for testers even in trivial cases) - would you mind to post the resulting combo patch for Jeff to test? Ingo -- 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/