On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 16:47:25 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
>
> Subject: NFS triggers WARN_ON() in invalidate_inode_pages2_range()
> References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7826
> Submitter : Andrew Clayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Caused-By : Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 16:47:25 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Subject: NFS triggers WARN_ON() in invalidate_inode_pages2_range()
References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7826
Submitter : Andrew Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Caused-By : Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Am Mittwoch 24 Januar 2007 21:45 schrieb Peter Osterlund:
> > Subject: pktcdvd fails with pata_amd
> > References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7810
> > Submitter : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Status : unknown
> Does reverting this patch help?
>
Am Mittwoch 24 Januar 2007 21:45 schrieb Peter Osterlund:
Subject: pktcdvd fails with pata_amd
References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7810
Submitter : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Status : unknown
Does reverting this patch help?
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Subject: pktcdvd fails with pata_amd
> References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7810
> Submitter : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Status : unknown
Does reverting this patch help?
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 11:57:09AM -0500, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 05:38:01PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > Was the removed
> > setCx86(CX86_CCR3, ccr3);
> > without any effects?
>
> I didn't think that was ever checked in. I thought the patch was still
> being
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 05:38:01PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Was the removed
> setCx86(CX86_CCR3, ccr3);
> without any effects?
I didn't think that was ever checked in. I thought the patch was still
being discussed.
The line missing will not as far as I can see cause any problems, it
will
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 11:06:31AM -0500, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 04:47:25PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > Subject: fix geode_configure()
> > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/9/216
> > Submitter : Lennart Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Caused-By : takada
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 04:47:25PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Subject: fix geode_configure()
> References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/9/216
> Submitter : Lennart Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Caused-By : takada <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> commit
This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc5 compared to 2.6.19
that are not yet fixed in Linus' tree.
If you find your name in the Cc header, you are either submitter of one
of the bugs, maintainer of an affectected subsystem or driver, a patch
of you caused a breakage or I'm
This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc5 compared to 2.6.19
that are not yet fixed in Linus' tree.
If you find your name in the Cc header, you are either submitter of one
of the bugs, maintainer of an affectected subsystem or driver, a patch
of you caused a breakage or I'm
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 11:06:31AM -0500, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 04:47:25PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Subject: fix geode_configure()
References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/9/216
Submitter : Lennart Sorensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Caused-By : takada [EMAIL
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 05:38:01PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Was the removed
setCx86(CX86_CCR3, ccr3);
without any effects?
I didn't think that was ever checked in. I thought the patch was still
being discussed.
The line missing will not as far as I can see cause any problems, it
will
This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc5 compared to 2.6.19
that are not yet fixed in Linus' tree.
If you find your name in the Cc header, you are either submitter of one
of the bugs, maintainer of an affectected subsystem or driver, a patch
of you caused a breakage or I'm
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 04:47:25PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Subject: fix geode_configure()
References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/9/216
Submitter : Lennart Sorensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Caused-By : takada [EMAIL PROTECTED]
commit e4f0ae0ea63caceff37a13f281a72652b7ea71ba
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 11:57:09AM -0500, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 05:38:01PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Was the removed
setCx86(CX86_CCR3, ccr3);
without any effects?
I didn't think that was ever checked in. I thought the patch was still
being discussed.
...
Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Subject: pktcdvd fails with pata_amd
References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7810
Submitter : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Status : unknown
Does reverting this patch help?
This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc5 compared to 2.6.19
that are not yet fixed in Linus' tree.
If you find your name in the Cc header, you are either submitter of one
of the bugs, maintainer of an affectected subsystem or driver, a patch
of you caused a breakage or I'm
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 14:43:29 +1100, David Chinner wrote:
...
> > > Subject: BUG: at mm/truncate.c:60 cancel_dirty_page() (XFS)
> > > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/5/308
> > > Submitter : Sami Farin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Handled-By : David Chinner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 14:43:29 +1100, David Chinner wrote:
...
Subject: BUG: at mm/truncate.c:60 cancel_dirty_page() (XFS)
References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/5/308
Submitter : Sami Farin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Handled-By : David Chinner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Status :
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:15:02PM +1100, David Chinner wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 08:11:25AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 02:27:48PM -0500, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > >...
> > > A lot of developers (including me) will be gone next week for
> > > Linux.Conf.Au, so
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:15:02PM +1100, David Chinner wrote:
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 08:11:25AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 02:27:48PM -0500, Linus Torvalds wrote:
...
A lot of developers (including me) will be gone next week for
Linux.Conf.Au, so you have a
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 08:11:25AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 02:27:48PM -0500, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >...
> > A lot of developers (including me) will be gone next week for
> > Linux.Conf.Au, so you have a week of rest and quiet to test this, and
> > report any
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 08:11:25AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 02:27:48PM -0500, Linus Torvalds wrote:
...
A lot of developers (including me) will be gone next week for
Linux.Conf.Au, so you have a week of rest and quiet to test this, and
report any problems.
* Damien Wyart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Subject: BUG: scheduling while atomic: hald-addon-stor/...
> > cdrom_{open,release,ioctl} in trace
> > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/26/105
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/29/22
> >
* Damien Wyart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Subject: BUG: scheduling while atomic: hald-addon-stor/...
cdrom_{open,release,ioctl} in trace
References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/26/105
http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/29/22
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 04:51:36PM +0100, Damien Wyart wrote:
* Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070113 08:11]:
This still leaves the old regressions we have not yet fixed...
This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc5 compared to 2.6.19.
On 1/13/07, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 04:51:36PM +0100, Damien Wyart wrote:
> * Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070113 08:11]:
> > This still leaves the old regressions we have not yet fixed...
> > This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc5
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 04:51:36PM +0100, Damien Wyart wrote:
> * Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070113 08:11]:
> > This still leaves the old regressions we have not yet fixed...
> > This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc5 compared to 2.6.19.
>
> > Subject: BUG: scheduling
* Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070113 08:11]:
> This still leaves the old regressions we have not yet fixed...
> This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc5 compared to 2.6.19.
> Subject: BUG: scheduling while atomic: hald-addon-stor/...
> cdrom_{open,release,ioctl}
* Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070113 08:11]:
This still leaves the old regressions we have not yet fixed...
This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc5 compared to 2.6.19.
Subject: BUG: scheduling while atomic: hald-addon-stor/...
cdrom_{open,release,ioctl} in
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 04:51:36PM +0100, Damien Wyart wrote:
* Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070113 08:11]:
This still leaves the old regressions we have not yet fixed...
This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc5 compared to 2.6.19.
Subject: BUG: scheduling while atomic:
On 1/13/07, Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 04:51:36PM +0100, Damien Wyart wrote:
* Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070113 08:11]:
This still leaves the old regressions we have not yet fixed...
This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc5 compared to
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 04:51:36PM +0100, Damien Wyart wrote:
* Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070113 08:11]:
This still leaves the old regressions we have not yet fixed...
This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc5 compared to 2.6.19.
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 02:27:48PM -0500, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>...
> A lot of developers (including me) will be gone next week for
> Linux.Conf.Au, so you have a week of rest and quiet to test this, and
> report any problems.
>
> Not that there will be any, right? You all behave now!
>...
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 02:27:48PM -0500, Linus Torvalds wrote:
...
A lot of developers (including me) will be gone next week for
Linux.Conf.Au, so you have a week of rest and quiet to test this, and
report any problems.
Not that there will be any, right? You all behave now!
...
This
36 matches
Mail list logo
