Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752829Ab0GIRuR (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jul 2010 13:50:17 -0400 Received: from cpoproxy1-pub.bluehost.com ([69.89.21.11]:58652 "HELO cpoproxy1-pub.bluehost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751614Ab0GIRuP (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jul 2010 13:50:15 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=virtuousgeek.org; h=Received:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:X-Mailer:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Identified-User; b=VZfxtzy5o4N0bHZPB4kwq0Z/Apry6o3L7++rUEMOXYpjYTgc2K7Lv1Q3lqXAxWy8etBkTCKNvsa8CSAE8af3YeBOqgqvnnugfhvhJ1g+VPWm9+qgXd4MUCDvyTpFq4T7; Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 10:49:53 -0700 From: Jesse Barnes To: Woody Suwalski Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: Yet another 2.6.35 regression (AGP)? Message-ID: <20100709104953.7028c6b7@virtuousgeek.org> In-Reply-To: <4C374DFF.7050008@gmail.com> References: <4C374DFF.7050008@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.18.9; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Identified-User: {10642:box514.bluehost.com:virtuous:virtuousgeek.org} {sentby:smtp auth 75.110.194.140 authed with jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org} Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1759 Lines: 50 On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 12:27:43 -0400 Woody Suwalski wrote: > Jesse Barnes wrote: > > On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 10:21:56 -0400 > > Woody Suwalski wrote: > > > > > >> I have found one system, where 2.6.35 does not work (as tested with rc3 > >> and rc4) > >> That Intel system has no problems in 2.6.33.x nor 2.6.34.0. > >> > >> The problem seems to be in AGP - I can boot if I specify "agp=off" - but > >> of course only in text mode... > >> There seems to be a hard lock-up, so the only way to show the crash is > >> by picture 8-) > >> > >> Since I do not build kernel on that machine, I did not do any bisect > >> tests, however if someone is interested in digging deeper, I can try... > >> Preferably a patch to try out ;-) > >> > >> This bug seems to be different then > >> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16179 > >> > >> Should it be blamed on BIOS (the conflict indicated just before the crash)? > >> > > Well even if the BIOS is doing something bad, if we handled it in > > earlier kernels we should handle it today. So this sounds like a > > regression. > > > > A bisect should help if it was working before, can you do that? > > > > > OK, I have never really done the brute-force bissecting, but there is > always first time... > Will try to do it over the weekend... Great, thanks. > Unless U will be visiting Ottawa and want to do it yourself ;-) Nope, no immediate plans. :) -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- 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/