https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42725
--- Comment #38 from Alex Shi <alex....@intel.com> 2012-06-20 00:20:36 --- (In reply to comment #37) > This is going far slower than I had anticipated. For every step I test as > either good or bad there are at least 4 I have to skip because they either > don't compile or panic on boot, is this expected? Sometimes, the Linus' tree also has a bad quality. :( You'd better to keep skipping until the buggy serial patches out. I means don't do testing, just repeat $git bisect skip > > And still, I don't think I properly understand how the process works, for > instance, 2.6.35-rc1 and rc3 panic on boot, however in the way I understand it > they should be good because I'm using 2.6.35 stable and it doesn't show the > bug, should I skip those or should I mark them as good without testing? The assumption is incorrect, actually, .35-rcx is delivered before final .35 kernel. the rc version is testing kernel. In fact, git bisect is quite smart to find the next mid commitment in the tree. Could you send out the output of $git bisect log. Let's see what'd you got. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are watching the assignee of the bug. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ acpi-bugzilla mailing list acpi-bugzilla@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/acpi-bugzilla
