On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 11:05 PM, Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 3:15 AM, Kamalesh Babulal
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
>
> > Thanks for pointing the patch, I do not have the SES config option enabled,
> > then too i tried your patch, but that does
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 3:15 AM, Kamalesh Babulal
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for pointing the patch, I do not have the SES config option enabled,
> then too i tried your patch, but that does not solve the panic. The kernel
> panic's with the same panic message as before. I have
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 3:15 AM, Kamalesh Babulal
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for pointing the patch, I do not have the SES config option enabled,
then too i tried your patch, but that does not solve the panic. The kernel
panic's with the same panic message as before. I have attached
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 11:05 PM, Yinghai Lu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 3:15 AM, Kamalesh Babulal
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for pointing the patch, I do not have the SES config option enabled,
then too i tried your patch, but that does not solve the
Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 1:46 AM, Kamalesh Babulal
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Tuesday 12 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
>> >> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>> >>> Hi,
>> >>>
>> >>> On Monday 11
Yinghai Lu wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 1:46 AM, Kamalesh Babulal
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday 12 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Monday 11 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 13:07 +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > I worry that another git-bisect session will be needed unless SCSI
> > developers are already aware of the problem source.
>
> Yinghai Lu noticed that it may be actually a SES problem:
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/14/88
>
On Thursday 14 February 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thursday 14 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> > Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Tuesday 12 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> > >> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > >>> Hi,
>
Hi,
On Thursday 14 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tuesday 12 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> >> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Monday 11 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> Nish
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 1:46 AM, Kamalesh Babulal
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tuesday 12 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> >> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Monday 11 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tuesday 12 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
>> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Monday 11 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Nish Aravamudan wrote:
> On 2/7/08, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday 12 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Monday 11 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Nish Aravamudan wrote:
On 2/7/08, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 07 February
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 1:46 AM, Kamalesh Babulal
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday 12 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Monday 11 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Nish Aravamudan
Hi,
On Thursday 14 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday 12 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Monday 11 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Nish Aravamudan wrote:
On 2/7/08,
On Thursday 14 February 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Thursday 14 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday 12 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Monday 11
On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 13:07 +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
I worry that another git-bisect session will be needed unless SCSI
developers are already aware of the problem source.
Yinghai Lu noticed that it may be actually a SES problem:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/14/88
[ I
Hi,
On Tuesday 12 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Monday 11 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> >> Nish Aravamudan wrote:
> >>> On 2/7/08, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 07 February 2008,
Hi,
On Tuesday 12 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Monday 11 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Nish Aravamudan wrote:
On 2/7/08, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 07 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Monday 11 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
>> Nish Aravamudan wrote:
>>> On 2/7/08, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thursday 07 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>> Hi,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Monday 11 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Nish Aravamudan wrote:
On 2/7/08, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 07 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday 06
Hi,
On Monday 11 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> Nish Aravamudan wrote:
> > On 2/7/08, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Thursday 07 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> >>> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wednesday 06 February
Nish Aravamudan wrote:
> On 2/7/08, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thursday 07 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
>>> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday 06 February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Wed 2008-02-06 11:53:34, Pavel
On 2/7/08, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thursday 07 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> > Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Wednesday 06 February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > >> On Wed 2008-02-06 11:53:34, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > >>> Hi!
On 2/7/08, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 07 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday 06 February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Wed 2008-02-06 11:53:34, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
Trying to boot
Nish Aravamudan wrote:
On 2/7/08, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 07 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday 06 February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Wed 2008-02-06 11:53:34, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
Trying to
On Thursday 07 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wednesday 06 February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >> On Wed 2008-02-06 11:53:34, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >>> Hi!
> >>>
> >>> Trying to boot 2.6.25-git0 (few days old), I get
> >>>
> >>> BUG:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wednesday 06 February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> On Wed 2008-02-06 11:53:34, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> Trying to boot 2.6.25-git0 (few days old), I get
>>>
>>> BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ..ffb0
>>> IP at
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday 06 February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Wed 2008-02-06 11:53:34, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
Trying to boot 2.6.25-git0 (few days old), I get
BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ..ffb0
IP at init_irq+0x42e
init_irq? hmm...
On Thursday 07 February 2008, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday 06 February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Wed 2008-02-06 11:53:34, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
Trying to boot 2.6.25-git0 (few days old), I get
BUG: unable to handle kernel
Hi,
On Wednesday 06 February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Wed 2008-02-06 11:53:34, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > Trying to boot 2.6.25-git0 (few days old), I get
> >
> > BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ..ffb0
> > IP at init_irq+0x42e
init_irq? hmm...
> > Call
On Wed 2008-02-06 11:53:34, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Trying to boot 2.6.25-git0 (few days old), I get
>
> BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ..ffb0
> IP at init_irq+0x42e
>
> Call trace:
> ide_device_add_all
> ide_generic_init
> kernel_init
> child_rip
> vgacon_cursor
>
On Wed 2008-02-06 11:53:34, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
Trying to boot 2.6.25-git0 (few days old), I get
BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ..ffb0
IP at init_irq+0x42e
Call trace:
ide_device_add_all
ide_generic_init
kernel_init
child_rip
vgacon_cursor
kernel_init
Hi,
On Wednesday 06 February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Wed 2008-02-06 11:53:34, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
Trying to boot 2.6.25-git0 (few days old), I get
BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ..ffb0
IP at init_irq+0x42e
init_irq? hmm...
Call trace:
33 matches
Mail list logo