| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <3e8340491001062004h302912a5h8ac441f9fe629af6@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 23:04:16 -0500 From: Bryan Donlan <bdonlan@...il.com> To: Robert Hancock <hancockrwd@...il.com> Cc: Anders Eriksson <aeriksson@...tmail.fm>, mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Memory probing fails after 2.6.30 (bisected) On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 6:53 PM, Robert Hancock <hancockrwd@...il.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 2:32 AM, Anders Eriksson <aeriksson@...tmail.fm> wrote: >> >> hancockrwd@...il.com said: >>> Think you missed posting which was the actual bad commit it reported? >> >> The last one in the list: >> 8ecee4620e76aae418bfa0e8cc830e92cb559bbb >> >> That's a merge commit. How do i dig futher into that? My git-fu is lacking... > > AFAIK, the bisect shouldn't land on a merge commit unless the changes > in the commit itself are what are causing the problem, and the merge > commit itself doesn't have any changes. Is it possible something went > wrong in the bisect and one of your good/bad results was incorrect? It's also possible for the bisect to land on a merge if each parent of the merge works, but combining them leads to an interaction causing the bug. I'd suggest specifically retesting each of the parents of the merge, and the merge itself. -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists