From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261672AbUKGSo1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Nov 2004 13:44:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261674AbUKGSo1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Nov 2004 13:44:27 -0500 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:12718 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261672AbUKGSoW (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Nov 2004 13:44:22 -0500 Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 10:44:19 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Christian Kujau cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, alsa-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, perex@suse.cz Subject: Re: Oops in 2.6.10-rc1 In-Reply-To: <20041107182155.M43317@g-house.de> Message-ID: References: <4180F026.9090302@g-house.de> <4180FDB3.8080305@g-house.de> <418A47BB.5010305@g-house.de> <418D7959.4020206@g-house.de> <20041107130553.M49691@g-house.de> <418E4705.5020001@g-house.de> <20041107182155.M43317@g-house.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Christian Kujau wrote: > On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 08:57:40 -0800 (PST), Linus Torvalds wrote > > > > You can check the ALSA tree _before_ the merge, by doing (in > > the current tree): > > > > bk undo -a1.2000.7.2 > > > > which should give you a tree without any of "my" stuff, ie it > > was what Jaroslav was working on before he merged it into the > > standard tree. > > yes, i already did so, i think: > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=109979092216919&w=2 > > but i did it this way: > bk clone -r1.2000.7.1 linux-2.6-BK linux-2.6-BK-test > bk undo -a1.2010 Hmm.. That may well have worked fine, but it sounds in that post like you tried to undo the ALSA stuff, and what I suggested was really to do the reverse: take _only_ the ALSA changes, and then if it still fails, at least you have now pinpointed it a bit more (admittedly to the _likely_ source, but that's as it should be: you narrow down the "known bad" source base until you've narrowed it down to the smallest change you can find that causes the problem). > > Yes, that makes me suspicious, and is one reason why I wonder > > if it's just your tree not being built right. > > i'll build a -bk snapshot from a tar.bz2 later on and see what it gives. Sounds like you're doing everything right, but hey, it can't hurt to double-check. Linus