[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120329211244.GA18684@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 17:12:44 -0400
From: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: lockups shortly after booting in current git.
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 01:59:33PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:
> >
> > I'd suggest restricting the bisect to fs/ first, and if that comes up
> > with something non-sensical, you can always use the good/bad data
> > points for a whole tree bisect.
> >
> > One commit that you might want to try testing is b43d17f31^, and see
> > whether that works. One potential commit that might be suspicious is
> > b43d17f31 given the stack trace shows one process apparently waiting
> > on PageWriteback.
>
> Ahh, that does sound interesting and relevant.
>
> Yeah, maybe the directed approach is worth it. In fact, considering
> the above commie, maybe it might be worth it to be *very* directed,
> and just test that one thing first, and maybe even skip the bisection
> entirely and just test a revert if it looks promising.
I'll try a build with just that reverted, given the bisect build is taking a while.
Any thoughts on any printk's I could add to verify a situation occurred or not ?
The problem with bisecting a bug like this is that it's hard to tell if
the bug has been fixed, or if I've just not hit it yet.
Dave
--
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