[lkml]   [2008]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Bootup time regression from 2.6.27 to 2.6.28-rc3+

On Sun, 9 Nov 2008, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> for me, the plan is that we need to get Thomas' fixes tested by someone
> who can reproduce this very reliably. If they fix it, great.
> If they don't, time is running out and we need to remove the feature
> for 2.6.28 (that is 1 line of change), realizing that this just papers
> over stuff and isn't a real fix, and get back to it for 2.6.29.

I'd like to see the one-liner fix, even if it turns out to just be a
workaround that hides the issue and makes us go back to 2.6.27 behaviour.
I'm about to release -rc4 today, we should be aggressive about

If somebody can test the "real fix" independently, that's obviously fine,
but it's not an excuse for keeping a pending regression. If people end up
being 100% sure they found the bug later, we can then re-enable it, but
again - that has zero bearing on the fact that we should get rid of the
regression asap.


 \ /
  Last update: 2008-11-09 21:43    [W:0.061 / U:6.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site