I narrowed it down to 2.6.28-git2(Boots) while 2.6.28-git4(fails to boot).
I could not boot test 2.6.28-git3 as i ran into kernel compilation issues.
Here is the error message i got when i tried compiling 2.6.28-git3.
LD vmlinux.o
ld: dynreloc miscount for kernel/built-in.o,
At Sun, 22 Mar 2009 13:55:17 +0100,
Andreas Mohr wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 09:33:19PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Fri, 20 Mar 2009 19:56:40 +0100,
Andreas Mohr wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 10:19:53AM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
What is the output with -v
On 10/27/08, Eric Anholt e...@anholt.net wrote:
On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 14:27 +, Alan Jenkins wrote:
What does this mean, should I do anything about it? Is tiling nice to
have?
It sounds like GEM broke something - though maybe it just added a more
verbose error report.
System: EeePC 701
On 3/23/09, Alan Jenkins sourcejedi.l...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 10/27/08, Eric Anholt e...@anholt.net wrote:
On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 14:27 +, Alan Jenkins wrote:
What does this mean, should I do anything about it? Is tiling nice to
have?
It sounds like GEM broke something - though maybe
Rename the pagerange_is_ram() to pat_pagerange_is_ram() and add the
track legacy 1MB region as non RAM condition.
But the lowest 640K are most definitely RAM.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kernel-testers in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 10:49:45 +
Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote:
Rename the pagerange_is_ram() to pat_pagerange_is_ram() and
add the track legacy 1MB region as non RAM condition.
But the lowest 640K are most definitely RAM.
not all of it ;)
ram is defined as the kernel
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Wu Fengguang wrote:
I think this was tracked back to the effective halving of
dirty_ratio by 1cf6e7d83 (mm: task dirty accounting fix) and
doubling the ratio fixed the iozone regression.
Yes, exactly. The patch for fixing this regression is trivial.
I was
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of regressions introduced between 2.6.27 and 2.6.28.
The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
introduced between 2.6.27 and 2.6.28. Please verify if it still should
be
