>
>
aeriksson@fastmail.fm said:
> >
torvalds@linux-foundation.org said:
> >> I think we do want the bisect run here.
> >> My worry is that this is likely very timing-sensitive, so when it starts
> >> failing it might not be because of the commit that actually introduces the
> >> bug, but because some other timing changed, but with some luck that won't
> >> be the case.
>
> > I'm on it. Slow machine. Household's router, 4000 versions to go...
>
> The bisect came up with this:
>
> 18a056feccabdfa9764016a615121b194828bc72 is first bad commit
> commit 18a056feccabdfa9764016a615121b194828bc72