On 08/20/09 12:11, Jed Smith wrote:
> Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>>> Is it new with 188.8.131.52?
> Perhaps earlier, and we're just now running into it. I am able to
> reproduce on the v2.6.30 release. My initial bisect leads me here (from
> bad=v2.6.30 and good=v2.6.29 in linux-2.6.git):
> commit 9049a11de73d3ecc623f1903100d099f82ede56c
> Merge: c47c1b1 e4d0407
> Author: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed Feb 11 11:52:22 2009 -0800
> Merge commit 'remotes/tip/x86/paravirt' into x86/untangle2
> I note astutely, however, that's a pretty large merge commit.
Yeah. If it shows up in that merge, then obviously it must be one of
the constituent changes which is provoking the problem, unless there's
something about the merge itself.
Just to double check, can to test the two parents,
e4d0407185cdbdcfd99fc23bde2e5454bbc46329, to see if one or both exhibits
I see your bisect tested c47c1b1f3a9 as OK, so try e4d0407185.
Xen-devel mailing list