On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 01:30:33AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
quoted text
> Wolfgang Erig wrote:
> > Both are bad.
> > Two different systems and two different bisections.
> > I sent the last step of each.
> 
> >>> $ git bisect good 
> >>> Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this 
> >>> [626073132b381684c4983e0d911e9aceb32e2cbc] Assembly header and main routine for new x86 setup code 
> >> OK, so which one is the bad one?
> > 
> > This problem (no power off) persists after pull some minutes ago.
> > Sorry for the confusion.
> > 
> 
> I believe there must have been something wrong here (possibly
> inconsistent experiments?)  This checkin has *zero code changes* from
> the previous one (and next one) -- the kernel should have been binarily
> identical to the previous one.  The code introduced in this checkin
> doesn't even get compiled until two checkins later,
> 4fd06960f120e02e9abc802a09f9511c400042a5.

I have done two bisections simultanously and it was late at night.
I start again with a fresh tree and better controlled experiments.

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