Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Thursday, June 19, 2008 - 8:40 pm

Hi,

I am trying to track down a problem I reported here:

http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/6/11/431

None or you were cc'd on the original report because I had no idea of 
the source of the issue.  However, I have now narrowed down the problem 
to the auto-x86-next tree.  Thus I did something like:

$ git bisect start
$ git bisect good linus/master
$ git bisect bad tip/auto-x86-next

which resulted in only about 170 or so revisions to test (sounds better 
than the 3000 or so that -next wanted me to bisect through).  However, 
when I tried to compile the bisect-chosen commit, I get:

------------------

In file included from include/asm/thread_info.h:5,
                  from include/linux/thread_info.h:47,
                  from include/linux/preempt.h:9,
                  from include/linux/spinlock.h:49,
                  from include/linux/seqlock.h:29,
                  from include/linux/time.h:8,
                  from include/linux/stat.h:60,
                  from include/linux/module.h:10,
                  from crypto/sha1_generic.c:20:
include/asm/thread_info_64.h: In function ‘set_restore_sigmask’:
include/asm/thread_info_64.h:189: warning: passing argument 2 of 
‘set_bit’ from incompatible pointer type

-----------------

Can I ignore these warnings and keep building the kernel anyway?  Or is 
there a way to work around this problem?  Am I allowed to cherry pick a 
particular commit to apply on top of the bisect-chosen commit, or will 
that ruin the process?  Can I manually choose a bisection point right 
after this warning was fixed?  Is it likely that the fix for this 
warning will get rearranged in the tree before Linus pulls it so that 
other don't run into this same bisection problem?

Is that enough questions?

Thanks,

-- 
Kevin Winchester


--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Kevin Winchester, (Thu Jun 19, 8:40 pm)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Jun 20, 6:17 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Kevin Winchester, (Fri Jun 20, 7:37 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Jun 20, 11:36 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Kevin Winchester, (Fri Jun 20, 8:00 pm)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Yinghai Lu, (Fri Jun 20, 8:14 pm)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Kevin Winchester, (Sat Jun 21, 6:00 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Yinghai Lu, (Sat Jun 21, 6:18 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Kevin Winchester, (Sat Jun 21, 6:23 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Yinghai Lu, (Sat Jun 21, 6:30 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Kevin Winchester, (Sat Jun 21, 6:39 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Yinghai Lu, (Sat Jun 21, 6:50 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Kevin Winchester, (Sat Jun 21, 7:49 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Ingo Molnar, (Mon Jun 23, 7:12 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Pavel Machek, (Fri Jun 20, 6:49 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Kevin Winchester, (Fri Jun 20, 7:40 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Jun 20, 6:51 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Jun 20, 6:07 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Jun 20, 6:04 am)
Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?, Kevin Winchester, (Fri Jun 20, 6:23 pm)