This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of regressions introduced between 2.6.28 and 2.6.29.
The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
introduced between 2.6.28 and 2.6.29. Please verify if it still should
be listed and let me know (either way
This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of regressions introduced between 2.6.28 and 2.6.29.
The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
introduced between 2.6.28 and 2.6.29. Please verify if it still should
be listed and let me know (either way
This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of regressions introduced between 2.6.28 and 2.6.29.
The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
introduced between 2.6.28 and 2.6.29. Please verify if it still should
be listed and let me know (either way
This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of regressions introduced between 2.6.28 and 2.6.29.
The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
introduced between 2.6.28 and 2.6.29. Please verify if it still should
be listed and let me know (either way
On Mon, 4 May 2009 10:27:11 +0500
**UNKNOWN CHARSET** wrote:
> 2009/4/28 FUJITA Tomonori :
> > On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:18:57 +0500
> > **UNKNOWN CHARSET** wrote:
> >
> >> No, it is regression. I can reproduce that without allowdac and any
> >> other unnecessary boot options.
> >
> > Hmm, in the b
On Tue, 5 May 2009 10:46:16 +0500
**UNKNOWN CHARSET** wrote:
> Full dmesg there: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=21222
> Got this:
> [ cut here ]
> WARNING: at fs/namei.c:1251 lookup_one_len+0xe9/0x100()
> Hardware name: HP xw9400 Workstation
> Modules linked
Full dmesg there: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=21222
Got this:
[ cut here ]
WARNING: at fs/namei.c:1251 lookup_one_len+0xe9/0x100()
Hardware name: HP xw9400 Workstation
Modules linked in: fuse nfs auth_rpcgss lockd sunrpc scsi_wait_scan
usbhid ohci_hcd usb_st
2009/5/4 Grant Grundler :
> 2009/5/3 Данила Жукоцкий :
> ...
>> WARNING: at lib/dma-debug.c:607 check_unmap+0x542/0x610()
>> Hardware name: HP xw9400 Workstation
>> 3w-9xxx 0001:45:00.0: DMA-API: device driver tries to free DMA memory
>> it has not allocated [device address=0x] [siz
2009/5/3 Данила Жукоцкий :
...
> WARNING: at lib/dma-debug.c:607 check_unmap+0x542/0x610()
> Hardware name: HP xw9400 Workstation
> 3w-9xxx 0001:45:00.0: DMA-API: device driver tries to free DMA memory
> it has not allocated [device address=0x] [size=36
> bytes]
This is definitely
2009/4/28 FUJITA Tomonori :
> On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:18:57 +0500
> **UNKNOWN CHARSET** wrote:
>
>> No, it is regression. I can reproduce that without allowdac and any
>> other unnecessary boot options.
>
> Hmm, in the bug repport, you said that you can't reproduce the problem:
>
> http://bugzilla.
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:18:57 +0500
**UNKNOWN CHARSET** wrote:
> No, it is regression. I can reproduce that without allowdac and any
> other unnecessary boot options.
Hmm, in the bug repport, you said that you can't reproduce the problem:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13001#c15
I c
No, it is regression. I can reproduce that without allowdac and any
other unnecessary boot options. In later discussion Grant Grundler ask
me apply patch that show 32 bit dma devices in my system. Results I
attached to bugreport. Looks like only one 32 bit dma device in my
system is ata controller,
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 11:46:28 +0200 (CEST)
"Rafael J. Wysocki" wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> of regressions introduced between 2.6.28 and 2.6.29.
>
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> introduced between 2.6.28 an
This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of regressions introduced between 2.6.28 and 2.6.29.
The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
introduced between 2.6.28 and 2.6.29. Please verify if it still should
be listed and let me know (either way
This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.
The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.28. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).
Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_
15 matches
Mail list logo
