Re: [Bug #10117] 2.6.25-current-git sometimes hangs on boot -dual-core Sony Vaio

["Carlos R. Mafra" <crmafra2@gmail.com>]

On Wed 16.Apr'08 at  0:29:49 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 02:24:35PM -0700, Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote:
> >...
> > >> Both of them probabilistically hang early in the boot.
> > >> On both !CPUIDLE and hpet=disable seems to be working around the
> > >> problem.
> > >> Both are Core 2 Duo based with 64 bit kernel.
> > >> 
> > >> One difference I saw was that #10377 fails on battery. That may be
> > >> because when on battery CPUs may be running at lower freq during boot
> > >> and that is probably helping this problem in terms of timing.
> > >
> > >FWIW, this macbook pro1,1 has only a core 1 duo, so x86 == 32bit...
> > >Soeren
> > 
> > Sorry. When I said Core 2, I was referring to Carlos and his updates on
> > #10117.
> 
> This bug tracks Soerens problem.

Ok, sorry then. I know something odd happened with bug #10117 as
you so aggressively pointed out. 

In my defense I must say that I was about to report the hang with
"ACPI: Processor [CPU1] (supports 8 throttling states)" to lkml 
when I read Soeren's post in this list.
Then I did _not_ send the "me too" email and kept on following
what was going on.

So when I read that Soeren's bug was closed I wrote in the
bugzilla that I was still seeing the same issue, and that
I wanted to reopen it. I should not have done that and it
won't happen again.

> And the fact that Carlos and Mark discuss their different problems in 
> the same bug is just plain wrong.

You are saying it is a different problem, but it may be the same.
Sometimes I had to reboot 30+ times before the hang could happen!
And the last messages were _exactly_ the same.

But let's not argue about that, I just wanted to help by pointing
out that maybe the bug was being closed too early. In trying to
help I just caused more confusion, for which I appologize.

> We must learn to more aggressively point people at reporting their 
> issues in own bugs, instead of hijacking an already existing similar
> looking bug (that might be for a different issue).

I understand now, but you made me feel bad about it.