![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread Complete thread (EXPERIMENTAL) |
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 | ||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||
| Last update: 2008-03-28 03:39 [W:0.918 / U:0.300 seconds] ©2003-2005 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||