Messages in this thread | | | From | Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.6.25-rc4 | Date | Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:36:55 +0100 |
| |
On Monday 10 March 2008, Anders Eriksson wrote: > > aeriksson@fastmail.fm said: > > torvalds@linux-foundation.org said: > >> I think we do want the bisect run here. > >> My worry is that this is likely very timing-sensitive, so when it starts > >> failing it might not be because of the commit that actually introduces the > >> bug, but because some other timing changed, but with some luck that won't > >> be the case. > > > I'm on it. Slow machine. Household's router, 4000 versions to go... > > The bisect came up with this: > > 18a056feccabdfa9764016a615121b194828bc72 is first bad commit > commit 18a056feccabdfa9764016a615121b194828bc72
Hmm, this is the first commit _after_ the previous "guilty" commit 852738f39258deafb3d89c187cb1a4050820d555 so it just can't be the "real bad" one...
> Author: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com> > Date: Sat Jan 26 20:13:12 2008 +0100 > > ide: don't enable local IRQs for PIO-in in driver_cmd_intr() (take 2) > > Don't enable local IRQs for PIO-in protocol in driver_cmd_intr(). > > While at it: > > * Remove redundant rq->cmd_type check. > > * Read status register after enabling local IRQs for no-data protocol. > > v2: > * Re-add DRQ=1 check lost in v1 (noticed by Sergei). > > Acked-by: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com> > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com> > > :040000 040000 5fb514a261b13494c5e9c035f9e7598276ce8839 0fda2eb7d96335061741d7f54ed3e05ca34ac5b8 M drivers
| |