On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 11:23 PM, Andrew Morton
wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 22:05:59 +0100
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> Regressions are not limited to 'same config' kernels, last i checked. If that
>> has changed (or if i'm misunderstanding it) then it would be nice to hear a
>> clarification about tha
* Dave Airlie wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Dave Airlie wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> > If it now does not boot up if all its sub-options are enabled, even of
> >> > some
> >> > of those sub-options are new, does that count as a driver regression?
> >> > Sure i
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Dave Airlie wrote:
>
>>
>> > If it now does not boot up if all its sub-options are enabled, even of some
>> > of those sub-options are new, does that count as a driver regression? Sure
>> > it
>> > does to me ...
>>
>> But it doesn't to an
* Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> > If it now does not boot up if all its sub-options are enabled, even of some
> > of those sub-options are new, does that count as a driver regression? Sure
> > it
> > does to me ...
>
> But it doesn't to anyone else under any reasonable meaning of the word
> regre
> If it now does not boot up if all its sub-options are enabled, even of some
> of those sub-options are new, does that count as a driver regression? Sure it
> does to me ...
But it doesn't to anyone else under any reasonable meaning of the word
regression.
The config option states
"Choose t
* Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 10:05:59PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > Regressions are not limited to 'same config' kernels, last i checked. If
> > that
> > has changed (or if i'm misunderstanding it) then it would be nice to hear a
> > clarification about that from Li
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Jesse Barnes wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 20:32:32 +0100
>> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> Nobody has reacted to my related boot hang bugreport yet - and it's
>>> detailed and fully reproducible (so i can test any proposed fixes as
>>> well in short order). I
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 07:56:03PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Do you see my argument why any user who is hit by this would categorize this
> as a kernel regression in an existing driver?
No. If a user changes configuration and gets a hang, that's a bug but
not a regression.
--
Matthew Garret
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 09:22:54PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> " Hey, -rc7 just hung on me after enabling this new .config option it
> offered for the radeon driver i am using, please add this to the list of
> regressions. "
If the same configuration options hang on both an old kernel
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 10:05:59PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Regressions are not limited to 'same config' kernels, last i checked. If that
> has changed (or if i'm misunderstanding it) then it would be nice to hear a
> clarification about that from Linus.
If an option has *never* worked on a
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 7:23 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 22:05:59 +0100
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
>>
>> * Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>
>> > On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 09:22:54PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> >
>> > > " Hey, -rc7 just hung on me after enabling this new .config option it
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 13:23:46 -0800
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 22:05:59 +0100
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> >
> > * Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 09:22:54PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > > " Hey, -rc7 just hung on me after enabling this new .conf
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 22:05:59 +0100
Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 09:22:54PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > > " Hey, -rc7 just hung on me after enabling this new .config option it
> > > offered for the radeon driver i am using, please ad
* Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 09:22:54PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > " Hey, -rc7 just hung on me after enabling this new .config option it
> > offered for the radeon driver i am using, please add this to the list
> > of
> > regressions. "
>
> If the same c
* Jesse Barnes wrote:
[...]
> > That action might hang or crash his kernel, and if that user then
> > reports:
> >
> > " Hey, -rc7 just hung on me after enabling this new .config option
> > it offered for the radeon driver i am using, please add this to the
> > list of regressions. "
> >
>
* Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 08:19:35PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 07:56:03PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > > Do you see my argument why any user who is hit by this would categorize
> > > > this as
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 21:22:54 +0100
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > This is the .config issue right? It doesn't sound like the bug is
> > new, you're just seeing now it because of the way you run tests.
> > It shouldn't affect any more or fewer users than it did before, and
> > reverting the "move radeon KM
* Dave Airlie wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 5:24 AM, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, Alex Deucher wrote:
> >>
> >> And if it crashes, he'll report a bug and we'll fix it.
> >
> > Ok, you have a bug-report. See earlier in the thread:
> >
> >> btw., i just found another
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 20:32:32 +0100
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Nobody has reacted to my related boot hang bugreport yet - and it's
> detailed and fully reproducible (so i can test any proposed fixes as
> well in short order). I.e. my limited testing has triggered two
> separate bugs in the same driver - a
* Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 20:32:32 +0100
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Nobody has reacted to my related boot hang bugreport yet - and it's
> > detailed and fully reproducible (so i can test any proposed fixes as
> > well in short order). I.e. my limited testing has triggered two
> >
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 5:24 AM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, Alex Deucher wrote:
>>
>> And if it crashes, he'll report a bug and we'll fix it.
>
> Ok, you have a bug-report. See earlier in the thread:
>
>> btw., i just found another bug activated via this same commit, a boot han
* Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 2:06 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Alex Deucher wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> >
> >> > * Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 06:54:45PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> >>
> >>
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 08:19:35PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 07:56:03PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > > Do you see my argument why any user who is hit by this would categorize
> > > this as a kernel regression in an existing driver
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, Alex Deucher wrote:
>
> And if it crashes, he'll report a bug and we'll fix it.
Ok, you have a bug-report. See earlier in the thread:
> btw., i just found another bug activated via this same commit, a boot hang
> after DRM init:
>
> [9.858352] [drm] Connector 1:
> [
* Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 07:56:03PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > Do you see my argument why any user who is hit by this would categorize
> > this as a kernel regression in an existing driver?
>
> No. If a user changes configuration and gets a hang, that's a bug bu
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 2:06 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Alex Deucher wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> >
>> > * Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 06:54:45PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > But you could claim that it's not a regre
* Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 06:54:45PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >>
> >> > But you could claim that it's not a regression because 1) technically the
> >> > code got introduced in
* Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 07:12:18PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > The reason the option was in staging (as has been mentioned before) was
> > > because the ABI wasn't felt to be stable enough. Upstream is now willing
> > > to
> >
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 06:54:45PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> But you could claim that it's not a regression because 1) technically the
> code got introduced in drivers/staging/, and staging drivers are not on the
> regression list 2) the Kconfig value is default-off so it can only harm those
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 06:08:26PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Well, once i applied the revert i got no more hangs or crashes today, in lots
> of bootups. This is fully repeatable - if i re-apply that commit with the
> config i sent the hang happens again.
If you leave the commit applied, use t
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 07:12:18PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > The reason the option was in staging (as has been mentioned before) was
> > because the ABI wasn't felt to be stable enough. Upstream is now willing to
> > commit to that stability, so now seems as goo
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 06:54:45PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>
>> > But you could claim that it's not a regression because 1) technically the
>> > code got introduced in drivers/staging/, and staging drivers are
* Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 06:54:45PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > But you could claim that it's not a regression because 1) technically the
> > code got introduced in drivers/staging/, and staging drivers are not on
> > the regression list 2) the Kconfig value is d
* Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 06:08:26PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > Well, once i applied the revert i got no more hangs or crashes today, in
> > lots of bootups. This is fully repeatable - if i re-apply that commit
> > with the config i sent the hang happens again.
>
* Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > Well, once i applied the revert i got no more hangs or crashes today, in
> > lots of bootups. This is fully repeatable - if i re-apply that commit
> > with the config i sent the hang happens again.
>
> But that's just bec
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 08:17:05AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> btw., i just found another bug activated via this same commit, a boot hang
> after DRM init:
The commit in question didn't cause the hang, so reverting it isn't the
appropriate fix.
--
Matthew Garrett | mj...@srcf.ucam.org
--
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> Well, once i applied the revert i got no more hangs or crashes today, in lots
> of bootups. This is fully repeatable - if i re-apply that commit with the
> config i sent the hang happens again.
But that's just because when it was in staging, you'd ne
* Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 08:17:05AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > btw., i just found another bug activated via this same commit, a boot
> > hang after DRM init:
>
> The commit in question didn't cause the hang, so reverting it isn't the
> appropriate fix.
Well, o
38 matches
Mail list logo
