Re: [bisected] i915 regression in post 2.6.36 kernels

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Johannes Hirte
Date: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - 3:39 pm

On Wednesday 10 November 2010 08:46:40 Chris Wilson wrote:

Did so. I've started with v2.6.36 for bisect good and 
f6614b7bb405a9b35dd28baea989a749492c46b2 for bisect bad (was HEAD) in this
case. Again I ended in 5c12a07e8073295ce8b57a822f811ac34e4f8420 as the first
bad commit. The regression was introduced there, as the commit before is fine.
If it was reverted, the regression should be fixed by this. But I don't find
neither the fix/revert nor the reintroduction of the regression.

regrards,
  Johannes
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[bisected] i915 regression in post 2.6.36 kernels, Johannes Hirte, (Wed Nov 10, 12:02 am)
Re: [bisected] i915 regression in post 2.6.36 kernels, Chris Wilson, (Wed Nov 10, 12:46 am)
Re: [bisected] i915 regression in post 2.6.36 kernels, Johannes Hirte, (Wed Nov 10, 3:39 pm)
Re: [bisected] i915 regression in post 2.6.36 kernels, Florian Mickler, (Fri Nov 12, 11:20 am)
Re: [bisected] i915 regression in post 2.6.36 kernels, Johannes Hirte, (Fri Nov 12, 1:08 pm)
Re: [bisected] i915 regression in post 2.6.36 kernels, Johannes Hirte, (Sat Nov 13, 3:34 pm)