On Fri, 2016-03-04 at 09:58 -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > The alternative bisection was as unsatisfactory as the first: > again it fingered an irrelevant merge (rather than any commit > pulled in by that merge) as the bad commit. > > It seems this issue is too intermittent for bisection to be useful, > on my load anyway.
Darn. Thanks for trying. > The best I can do now is try v4.4 for a couple of days, to verify that > still comes out good (rather than the machine going bad coincident with > v4.5-rc), then try v4.5-rc7 to verify that that still comes out bad. Thanks, that would still be helpful. > I'll report back on those; but beyond that, I'll have to leave it to you. I haven't had any luck here :/ Can you give us a more verbose description of your test setup? - G5, which exact model? - 4k pages, no THP. - how much ram & swap? - building linus' tree, make -j ? - source and output on tmpfs? (how big?) - what device is the swap device? (you said SSD I think?) - anything else I've forgotten? Oh and can you send us your bisect logs, we can at least trust the bad results I think. cheers _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
