On 2017. 03. 21. 3:40, Rick Macklem wrote:
Gergely Czuczy wrote:
[stuff snipped]
Actually I want to test it, but you guys are so vehemently discussing
it, I thought it would be better to do so, once you guys settled your
analysis on the code. Also, me not having the problem occurring, I don't
think would mean it's solved, since that would only mean, the codepath
for my specific usecase works. There might be other things there as
well, what I don't hit.
I hope by vehemently, you didn't find my comments as nasty. If they did
come out that way, it was not what I intended and I apologize.

Let me know which patch should I test, and I will see to it in the next
couple of days, when I get the time to do it.
I've attached it here again and, yes, I would agree that the results you get
from testing are just another data point and not definitive.
(I'd say this statement is true of all testing of nontrivial code.)

Thanks in advance for any testing you can do, rick
I finally had the time to give it a go, but unfortunately there was something wrong with the built image, it was unable to find the root device during boot. I will try to just copy the kernel over a bit later, and see how it goes. I hope there are no ABI changes between the two revisions (the previously built world, and the patched kernel).

freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to