On Sun, 2007-07-15 at 23:11 +0200, Markus wrote:Yes, from your description, and with the now presented additional information that the git-snapshot exhibits the same symptoms, it sounds like cfs _may_ be implicated in some way. I can't imagine how at the moment. In your original report, there are other patches involved, which are an unknown variables. The git-snapshot contains very many changes other than cfs as well. I'd eliminate absolutely all unknowns as the first step. Yes. It would definitely be worth while to test a virgin stable kernel, and then add only cfs with identical config. Dmesg output may not turn up anything, but eliminating all other variables should either pin the tail on the donkey (cfs?) or vindicate it, and that's what needs to be nailed down solidly first. -Mike -
| Jon Smirl | 463 kernel developers missing! |
| Nigel Cunningham | Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway |
| Greg KH | Re: [malware-list] [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to a linux interface for on access scan... |
| Jeff Garzik | Re: Linux 2.6.23-rc9 and a heads-up for the 2.6.24 series.. |
git: | |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Linus Torvalds | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Evgeniy Polyakov | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
