linux-kernel - Re: [Bug 10864] [regression][bisected] ~90,000 wakeups as of 2.6.26-rc3

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4854D8C8.8080006@freemail.hu>
Date:	Sun, 15 Jun 2008 10:54:32 +0200
From:	Németh Márton <nm127@...email.hu>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Bug 10864] [regression][bisected] ~90,000 wakeups as of 2.6.26-rc3

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Németh Márton <nm127@...email.hu> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> I already mentioned at the bug report that 2.6.26-rc6 this is fixed.
>>
>> Maybe tell your robot to first check the latest activities in the bug 
>> report since the last -rc release. What I want also to tell your robot 
>> that it should mention what actions should be taken in case the bug 
>> should be still listed or when the bug can be closed.
> 
> i think the current regression tracking methods that Rafael uses work 
> very well and i'd like to thank Rafael for those efforts - to me as a 
> subsystem maintainer it is a _very_ useful thing.
> 
> In this case there was no real harm from the "this bug is already fixed" 
> condition - just an extra email. Real harm would only come from missed 
> regressions or from incorrectly closed regressions - but those are not 
> happening.
> 
> note that there is no "robot" involved in changing the state of bugs - 
> the real important work here is done by Rafael and checking whether a 
> bug is still relevant is an inevitably manual work. The mails and 
> reports are auto-generated but crawling discussions and determining the 
> status of a regression is very hard to automate.

Sorry, I thought a robot missed my comments in the bug tracking system for
the second time:

1.
Comment was on 2008-06-06 13:27:16 ( http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10864#c3 )
The mail was coming: 7 Jun 2008 22:42:57 +0200 (CEST) ( http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/6/7/193 )

2.
Comment was on 2008-06-13 23:19:53 ( http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10864#c4 )
The mail was coming: 14 Jun 2008 22:12:04 +0200 (CEST) ( http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/6/14/160 )

Nevertheless the bug #10864 can be closed I think.

Regards,

	Márton Németh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/