![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9412 > Subject : commit a878539ef994787c447a98c2e3ba0fe3dad984ec breaks boot on SB600 AHCI > Submitter : Srihari Vijayaraghavan <sriharivijayaraghavan@yahoo.com.au> > Date : 2008-03-12 17:15 (16 days old) > Handled-By : Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com> > Richard Zhao <richard.zhao@amd.com> Fixed by 4cde32fc4b32e96a99063af3183acdfd54c563f0, methinks. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9962 > Subject : mount: could not find filesystem > Submitter : Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > Date : 2008-02-12 14:34 (45 days old) > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/12/91 > Handled-By : Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com> > Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> Needs more info. The original oops that opened it is fixed, but.. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9976 > Subject : BUG: 2.6.25-rc1: iptables postrouting setup causes oops > Submitter : Ben Nizette <bn@niasdigital.com> > Date : 2008-02-12 12:46 (45 days old) > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/12/148 > Handled-By : Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@atmel.com> This one seems gone (and was apparently AVR-only): http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/13/607: "What ever the problem is it isn't immediately apparent in latest git so I guess we'll just have to keep our eyes peeled." > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9978 > Subject : 2.6.25-rc1: volanoMark regression > Submitter : Zhang, Yanmin <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> > Date : 2008-02-13 10:30 (44 days old) > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/13/128 > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/3/12/52 > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/3/18/81 > Handled-By : Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Hmm. It is a regression on one machine (2x quad-core stoakley), but not another (4x quad-core tigerton). Interestingly, the stoakley box numbers have apparently been all over the map. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10318 > Subject : WARNING: at arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c:43 kmap_atomic_prot+0x87/0x184() > Submitter : Pawel Staszewski <pstaszewski@artcom.pl> > Date : 2008-03-25 02:50 (3 days old) Andrew and seems to have debugged this down to a kzalloc(GFP_ATOMIC) or similar. I wonder if the bug is in that commit 3811dbf67162bd08412f1b0e02e554f353e93bdb ("SLUB: remove useless masking of GFP_ZERO"), because I don't think that masking was at all useless and I think my original 7fd272550bd43cc1d7289ef0ab2fa50de137e767 was correct. That apparently bogus commit says "GFP_ZERO is already masked out in new_slab()", but gfpflags is not just used for new_slab(), but for kmalloc_large() too. Which does *not* clear GFP_ZERO. Pawel, does reverting 3811dbf67162bd08412f1b0e02e554f353e93bdb fix it for you? Also, Rafael - do these reminder emails also go to the people who are mentioned in the regressions (especially people who are set up as being "hanled-by" or having patches for the problem)? Linus -- 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/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2008-03-28 02:39 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||