Home » Mailing list archives » linux-kernel » 2008 » April » 18

Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
[view in full thread]
From: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...>
To: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, <tglx@...>, <penberg@...>, <linux-usb@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <linux-mm@...>, <jmorris@...>, <sds@...>
Subject: Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good
Date: Friday, April 18, 2008 - 12:02 pm

On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com> wrote:
...


It gets stuck in kgdb_roundup_cpus(), verified by putting a printk()
before and after this call (in kgdb_handle_exception()). Simple, but
effective :-)


Vegard

-- 
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
	-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
Messages in current thread:
2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Thu Apr 17, 7:03 pm)
2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Mel Gorman, (Mon Apr 28, 12:42 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz..., (Mon Apr 28, 2:44 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Mel Gorman, (Tue Apr 29, 5:43 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Mel Gorman, (Tue Apr 29, 11:49 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Mel Gorman, (Tue Apr 29, 12:58 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz..., (Tue Apr 29, 5:37 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Mel Gorman, (Wed Apr 30, 7:16 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Andrew Morton, (Mon Apr 28, 12:59 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Mel Gorman, (Tue Apr 29, 5:39 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Fri Apr 18, 3:50 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Fri Apr 18, 3:53 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Pavel Machek, (Fri Apr 18, 7:07 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Pavel Machek, (Fri Apr 18, 5:42 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Alan Stern, (Fri Apr 18, 11:22 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Fri Apr 18, 3:57 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 5:22 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 8:18 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 3:09 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Pekka Enberg, (Fri Apr 18, 2:40 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 3:24 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, James Morris, (Fri Apr 18, 6:32 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Pekka Enberg, (Fri Apr 18, 3:25 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Fri Apr 18, 2:56 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Arjan van de Ven, (Fri Apr 18, 1:49 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Fri Apr 18, 2:10 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 3:19 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Fri Apr 18, 3:28 am)
Stack protector build failure (was Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looki..., Arjan van de Ven, (Fri Apr 18, 9:58 am)
Re: Stack protector build failure (was Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not l..., Arjan van de Ven, (Fri Apr 18, 12:57 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 5:28 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Paul Moore, (Thu Apr 17, 7:55 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Thu Apr 17, 9:35 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Paul Moore, (Fri Apr 18, 10:57 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Thu Apr 17, 8:04 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Paul Moore, (Fri Apr 18, 10:55 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Thu Apr 17, 7:40 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Thu Apr 17, 8:14 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Jason Wessel, (Thu Apr 17, 11:05 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 3:37 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Jason Wessel, (Fri Apr 18, 5:54 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Vegard Nossum, (Fri Apr 18, 7:46 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 8:34 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Vegard Nossum, (Fri Apr 18, 8:41 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Jason Wessel, (Fri Apr 18, 9:02 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Vegard Nossum, (Fri Apr 18, 9:22 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Jason Wessel, (Fri Apr 18, 9:27 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Vegard Nossum, (Fri Apr 18, 10:47 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Vegard Nossum, (Fri Apr 18, 12:02 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Greg KH, (Thu Apr 17, 7:24 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Kay Sievers, (Thu Apr 17, 8:48 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Fri Apr 18, 12:07 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Thu Apr 17, 9:12 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Dan Williams, (Thu Apr 17, 7:24 pm)