On 2007.06.20 16:02:37 +, Carlo Wood wrote:
>
> and I am not sure if you will consider the:
>
> agpgart: Failed to find bridge device (chip_id: 29a2)
>
> a bug.
yeah, the error message needs to be fixed only if AGP cap
exists. I was checking with other GMCH data sheets, we'd better
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 09:42:27AM +0800, Wang Zhenyu wrote:
> oops, missing 946G, what a name...
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Zhenyu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> diff --git a/drivers/char/agp/intel-agp.c b/drivers/char/agp/intel-agp.c
> index 0439ee9..145b4a1 100644
> ---
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 09:15:21AM +0800, Wang Zhenyu wrote:
> Carlo, pls try a kernel param of "pci=nommconf" to see if that could
> fix your hang.
This does not fix the problem.
Prestine 2.6.22-rc5 with param pci=nommconf results in:
^MPress any key to continue.
^MPress any key to continue.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 09:15:21AM +0800, Wang Zhenyu wrote:
> Yep, the device table patch doesn't change any function, so your problem
> started from when 965G support patch has been in kernel.
Yup
> Carlo, pls try a kernel param of "pci=nommconf" to see if that could
> fix your hang. There
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 03:11:20PM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> 2.6.22-rc5 BAD
> 2.6.22-rc4+somethingelse BAD
> 2.6.22-rc4+something GOOD
> 2.6.22-rc4 BAD
> ...
> 2.6.18-rc1 BAD
> 2.6.18 GOOD
Ok, that made no sense. I meant:
> 2.6.19-rc1 BAD
> 2.6.18 GOOD
--
Carlo Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To
On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 05:09:10PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Heh.
>
> Yeah, at this point I think we can pretty much guarantee that your problem
> is one of two cases:
>
> - either a bit random, and depends on some timing thing, and one of the
>kernels you marked "good" wasn't
On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 05:09:10PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Heh.
Yeah, at this point I think we can pretty much guarantee that your problem
is one of two cases:
- either a bit random, and depends on some timing thing, and one of the
kernels you marked good wasn't really.
Nope
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 03:11:20PM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
2.6.22-rc5 BAD
2.6.22-rc4+somethingelse BAD
2.6.22-rc4+something GOOD
2.6.22-rc4 BAD
...
2.6.18-rc1 BAD
2.6.18 GOOD
Ok, that made no sense. I meant:
2.6.19-rc1 BAD
2.6.18 GOOD
--
Carlo Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 09:15:21AM +0800, Wang Zhenyu wrote:
Yep, the device table patch doesn't change any function, so your problem
started from when 965G support patch has been in kernel.
Yup
Carlo, pls try a kernel param of pci=nommconf to see if that could
fix your hang. There might be
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 09:15:21AM +0800, Wang Zhenyu wrote:
Carlo, pls try a kernel param of pci=nommconf to see if that could
fix your hang.
This does not fix the problem.
Prestine 2.6.22-rc5 with param pci=nommconf results in:
^MPress any key to continue.
^MPress any key to continue.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 09:42:27AM +0800, Wang Zhenyu wrote:
oops, missing 946G, what a name...
Signed-off-by: Wang Zhenyu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff --git a/drivers/char/agp/intel-agp.c b/drivers/char/agp/intel-agp.c
index 0439ee9..145b4a1 100644
--- a/drivers/char/agp/intel-agp.c
+++
On 2007.06.20 16:02:37 +, Carlo Wood wrote:
and I am not sure if you will consider the:
agpgart: Failed to find bridge device (chip_id: 29a2)
a bug.
yeah, the error message needs to be fixed only if AGP cap
exists. I was checking with other GMCH data sheets, we'd better
disable AGP
On 2007.06.20 09:15:21 +, Wang Zhenyu wrote:
>
> I think for i965 we could have following patch to fix this, we may
> fail if no IGD device got detected.
>
oops, missing 946G, what a name...
Signed-off-by: Wang Zhenyu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff --git a/drivers/char/agp/intel-agp.c
On 2007.06.20 01:37:16 +, Carlo Wood wrote:
> The result of this patch is that the kernel starts to print
> "agpgart: Detected an Intel 965G Chipset." again with the usual
> disastrous results. Now, that doesn't mean that this patch is
> wrong - but it explains why the problem returns after
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 03:57:51PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > I'll redo the bisect with this new git.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Linus
>
> Well, I did a new 'git bisect' - and if you ask me - it is still broken.
>
> It's conclusion was
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 01:37:16AM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> Personally I am convinced that the real problem is with
> 985144db8f4cb7e56154b31bdf233d3550bf
>
> [AGPGART] intel_agp: fix device probe
>
> This patch trys to fix device probe in two cases. First we should
>
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 03:57:51PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > I'll redo the bisect with this new git.
>
> Thanks,
> Linus
Well, I did a new 'git bisect' - and if you ask me - it is still broken.
It's conclusion was this time:
hikaru:/usr/src/kernel/git/linux-2.6>git bisect
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 03:57:51PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
I'll redo the bisect with this new git.
Thanks,
Linus
Well, I did a new 'git bisect' - and if you ask me - it is still broken.
It's conclusion was this time:
hikaru:/usr/src/kernel/git/linux-2.6git bisect bad
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 01:37:16AM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
Personally I am convinced that the real problem is with
985144db8f4cb7e56154b31bdf233d3550bf
[AGPGART] intel_agp: fix device probe
This patch trys to fix device probe in two cases. First we should
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 03:57:51PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
I'll redo the bisect with this new git.
Thanks,
Linus
Well, I did a new 'git bisect' - and if you ask me - it is still broken.
It's conclusion was this time:
On 2007.06.20 01:37:16 +, Carlo Wood wrote:
The result of this patch is that the kernel starts to print
agpgart: Detected an Intel 965G Chipset. again with the usual
disastrous results. Now, that doesn't mean that this patch is
wrong - but it explains why the problem returns after this
On 2007.06.20 09:15:21 +, Wang Zhenyu wrote:
I think for i965 we could have following patch to fix this, we may
fail if no IGD device got detected.
oops, missing 946G, what a name...
Signed-off-by: Wang Zhenyu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff --git a/drivers/char/agp/intel-agp.c
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
>
> Conclusion: the weird behaviour that you think was wrong is
> totally due to git 1.4.4.4.
Ok. I'll bounce a note to Junio just due to curiosity in case he goes
"ahh, yeah, it was that known bug", but I'll otherwise ignore this.
Git-1.5.x is such a
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 01:42:18PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> You really do want to use git-1.5.x these days.
>
> It does look like 1.4.4.4 may have a bug, although I'm really surprised:
> we've certainly tweaked stuff in bisection, but I and others have used
> "git bisect" since long
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/scripts/package/Makefile b/scripts/package/Makefile
> > index 7c434e0..f758b75 100644
> > --- a/scripts/package/Makefile
> > +++ b/scripts/package/Makefile
>
> but this one has actually been
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
>
> Well,... when, and because, it's not a linear thing as you mentioned
> before - it's not necessarily precisely a cut into half... so I thought,
> seeing those weird (not half) numbers that that was the cause.
You're correct - "git bisect" will not
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 11:35:03AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I can follow along, but I get *totally*different* git bisection points!
>
> > hikaru:/usr/src/kernel/git/linux-2.6>git bisect start
> > hikaru:/usr/src/kernel/git/linux-2.6>git bisect bad v2.6.22-rc5
> >
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
>
> I suppose you mean: ... then you WILL get sensible values out of git
> bisect. But, since I already did a real "git bisect" without giving it
> random points, I am afraid you jumped conclusions.
Hey, fair enough.
That said, your "git bisect" really
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 08:12:25PM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> ones that boot correctly always booted correctly, while the ones that
> hung, always hung (although in a totally reproducable way).
Sorry - that should be "although NOT in a totally reproducable way"
If you every doubt it's the Real
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 10:01:34AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
> >
> > If you want my opinion on this: git bisect is broken :p
> > I was very surprised that it printed this at this point.
>
> Hmm. Possible. However, I *really* would need the git bisect
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
>
> If you want my opinion on this: git bisect is broken :p
> I was very surprised that it printed this at this point.
Hmm. Possible. However, I *really* would need the git bisect log to see
what's up. So far, we have never seen a bug in "git bisect"
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 09:25:48 +0900
Paul Mundt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> $ git show d09c6b809432668371b5de9102f4f9aa6a7c79cc | patch -p1 -R
> ... build and test ...
> $ git show d09c6b809432668371b5de9102f4f9aa6a7c79cc | patch -p1
> ... back to original (or git checkout-index -f
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 09:25:48 +0900
Paul Mundt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
$ git show d09c6b809432668371b5de9102f4f9aa6a7c79cc | patch -p1 -R
... build and test ...
$ git show d09c6b809432668371b5de9102f4f9aa6a7c79cc | patch -p1
... back to original (or git checkout-index -f mm/page_alloc.c) ...
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
If you want my opinion on this: git bisect is broken :p
I was very surprised that it printed this at this point.
Hmm. Possible. However, I *really* would need the git bisect log to see
what's up. So far, we have never seen a bug in git bisect that
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 10:01:34AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
If you want my opinion on this: git bisect is broken :p
I was very surprised that it printed this at this point.
Hmm. Possible. However, I *really* would need the git bisect log to see
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 08:12:25PM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
ones that boot correctly always booted correctly, while the ones that
hung, always hung (although in a totally reproducable way).
Sorry - that should be although NOT in a totally reproducable way
If you every doubt it's the Real Carlo
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
I suppose you mean: ... then you WILL get sensible values out of git
bisect. But, since I already did a real git bisect without giving it
random points, I am afraid you jumped conclusions.
Hey, fair enough.
That said, your git bisect really *does*
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 11:35:03AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
I can follow along, but I get *totally*different* git bisection points!
hikaru:/usr/src/kernel/git/linux-2.6git bisect start
hikaru:/usr/src/kernel/git/linux-2.6git bisect bad v2.6.22-rc5
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
Well,... when, and because, it's not a linear thing as you mentioned
before - it's not necessarily precisely a cut into half... so I thought,
seeing those weird (not half) numbers that that was the cause.
You're correct - git bisect will not always be
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
diff --git a/scripts/package/Makefile b/scripts/package/Makefile
index 7c434e0..f758b75 100644
--- a/scripts/package/Makefile
+++ b/scripts/package/Makefile
but this one has actually been modified. To
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 01:42:18PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
You really do want to use git-1.5.x these days.
It does look like 1.4.4.4 may have a bug, although I'm really surprised:
we've certainly tweaked stuff in bisection, but I and others have used
git bisect since long before the
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
Conclusion: the weird behaviour that you think was wrong is
totally due to git 1.4.4.4.
Ok. I'll bounce a note to Junio just due to curiosity in case he goes
ahh, yeah, it was that known bug, but I'll otherwise ignore this.
Git-1.5.x is such a
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 02:10:49AM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 08:18:58AM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > The obvious question of course is whether actually reverting this
> > changeset fixes your problem? I would be very surprised if it did.
>
> Having a git commit Id, like
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 08:18:58AM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> The obvious question of course is whether actually reverting this
> changeset fixes your problem? I would be very surprised if it did.
Having a git commit Id, like d09c6b809432668371b5de9102f4f9aa6a7c79cc,
how can I create a .diff file
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 11:49:05PM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> Kernels that work do NOT print "agpgart: Detected an Intel
> 965G Chipset." (All I know is that I have an ASUS P5B motherboard
> with a iP965, whether it's this 'G' or not I don't know).
>
The obvious question of course is whether
Because I CC new people, let me summarize:
2.6.18 works fine. Most kernels after that print
"agpgart: Detected an Intel 965G Chipset."
and then either hang (I have to hard reset them), hard
reset by themselves or print one or two more lines mostly
related to hardcrashes (memory page faults or
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 03:07:14PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> Out of curiousity, I'd like to see your lspci
> (not -v or anything, just run with no args)
$ lspci
00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corporation P965/G965 Memory Controller Hub (rev 02)
00:01.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation P965/G965 PCI
I cheered too soon ... I just tested 2.6.22-rc5 and it hangs
again at the same point, right after printing:
agpgart: Detected an Intel 965G Chipset.
So far I tested:
188e1f81ba31af1b65a2f3611df4c670b092bbacBAD 2007-06-17 04:09:12
v2.6.22-rc5
I cheered too soon ... I just tested 2.6.22-rc5 and it hangs
again at the same point, right after printing:
agpgart: Detected an Intel 965G Chipset.
So far I tested:
188e1f81ba31af1b65a2f3611df4c670b092bbacBAD 2007-06-17 04:09:12
v2.6.22-rc5
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 03:07:14PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
Out of curiousity, I'd like to see your lspci
(not -v or anything, just run with no args)
$ lspci
00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corporation P965/G965 Memory Controller Hub (rev 02)
00:01.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation P965/G965 PCI
Because I CC new people, let me summarize:
2.6.18 works fine. Most kernels after that print
agpgart: Detected an Intel 965G Chipset.
and then either hang (I have to hard reset them), hard
reset by themselves or print one or two more lines mostly
related to hardcrashes (memory page faults or
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 11:49:05PM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
Kernels that work do NOT print agpgart: Detected an Intel
965G Chipset. (All I know is that I have an ASUS P5B motherboard
with a iP965, whether it's this 'G' or not I don't know).
The obvious question of course is whether actually
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 08:18:58AM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
The obvious question of course is whether actually reverting this
changeset fixes your problem? I would be very surprised if it did.
Having a git commit Id, like d09c6b809432668371b5de9102f4f9aa6a7c79cc,
how can I create a .diff file
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 02:10:49AM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 08:18:58AM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
The obvious question of course is whether actually reverting this
changeset fixes your problem? I would be very surprised if it did.
Having a git commit Id, like
54 matches
Mail list logo
