Re: Bisecting tip/auto-x86-next?

["Kevin Winchester" <kjwinchester@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 7:17 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> * Kevin Winchester <kjwinchester@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am trying to track down a problem I reported here:
>>
>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/6/11/431
>
>  [ GART related bootup crash. ]

It isn't actually a crash - X comes up fine, just without direct
rendering (which really kills KDE4 performance).

>
>> 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
>
> ok, in that case you can use tip's topical structure and probably bisect
> purely x86/gart, which has all x86 gart changes.
>
> I.e. do something like this:
>
>  git-checkout tip/x86/gart
>
> build and boot that kernel, if it fails and mainline works then do:
>
>  git-bisect reset
>  git-bisect start
>  git-bisect good linus/master
>  git-bisect bad tip/x86/gart
>
> this should drastically reduce the number of bisection steps needed, to
> 3 or 4 iterations.
>

Thanks - I'll give this a try tonight.  As to your other emails:

> hm, could you send me the config that triggered this?

I will do so tonight when I am home again.  It is a UP AMD64 box with
a VIA chipset, if that helps.

> btw., you can probably ignore this one safely. Also please tell me at
> which commit ID you were at when you triggered this warning.

Good to know - I will get the commit ID tonight as well, although
wouldn't following the same bisection sequence that I did give you the
same bisection point?  I guess that would assume that linus/master and
auto-x86-next haven't changed much since last night, which might not
be correct.

Thanks,

-- 
Kevin Winchester