[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 2.6.29-rc8: Reported regressions from 2.6.28
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 07:55:49AM +0800, Jeff Chua wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 3:57 AM, Linus Torvalds
> <> wrote:
> > IOW, if you've pinpointed 71c11fb57b924c160297ccd9e1761db598d00ac2 as
> > being bad, then you should go back and double-check that its parent
> > (in this case 4607816f608b42a5379aca97ceed08378804c99f) is good.
> > Because if it's parent is also bad, then that just means that you made
> > some mistake in "git bisect".
> > In this case, it really sounds like maybe you marked the parent good, even
> > though you should have marked it bad.
> I should have been more careful, just got thrown off during the last
> few steps of the bisect. But with the bad association to the AP after
> a57a59f247b651e8ed6d3eeb7e2f9d83b83134c9 (iwlwifi: remove implicit
> direct scan), can someone suggest where to go from here?

The obvious question for me is did you try this?

git revert a57a59f247b651e8ed6d3eeb7e2f9d83b83134c9

Does that restore operation for you?

John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you might be all we have. Be ready.

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-03-17 16:03    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean