Re: [BUG BISECTED FAILED]

[Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com>]

On Sunday 29 December 2013, Gene Heskett wrote:
>Resend, incorrect subject line
>
>Here is the copy/paste of the final git bisect bad report:
>
>First, the reason for the bisect:
>gene@coyote:~/linux-stable$ dmesg | grep -A2 microcode
>[    0.518304] microcode: CPU0: patch_level=0x01000065
>[    0.518396] microcode: CPU1: patch_level=0x01000065
>[    0.518498] microcode: CPU2: patch_level=0x01000065
>[    0.518593] microcode: CPU3: patch_level=0x01000065
>[    0.518745] microcode: Microcode Update Driver: v2.00
><tigran@aivazian.fsnet.co.uk>, Peter Oruba
>
>The output above should have in each cpu case, a second, or final line
>showing a patch level 0x0100083 in all cases.
>This failure is on an AMD phenom 9550 equipt machine.
>
>I can and have built from the tarball pull, a 3.8.2 which does work
>correctly.  The tarball build of 3.8.3 fails as above, and a tarball
>build of 3.12.6 still fails.
>
>gene@coyote:~/linux-stable$ git bisect bad
>908e88f285b909011dc7dbce5abaacf123f2f68d is the first bad commit
>commit 908e88f285b909011dc7dbce5abaacf123f2f68d
>Author: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
>Date:   Mon Feb 25 16:09:12 2013 +0000
>
>I'll next do a "git checkout v3.8.2" to double check that it works.

FWIW, a git checkout v3.8.2  also fails, so next I'll move my working 
tarball build .configs into that tree & see if it works.  This is getting 
stranger, a checkout v3.8.2 is supposed to match the tarball I got from 
kernel.org isn't it?

Cheers, Gene