lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    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
    > <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> 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
    --
    John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
    linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-03-17 16:03    [W:0.028 / U:65.504 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site