On Tuesday 01 September 2009, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> Mikael Pettersson writes:
>  > Rafael J. Wysocki writes:
>  >  > On Saturday 29 August 2009, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
>  >  > > Mikael Pettersson writes:
>  >  > >  > Rafael J. Wysocki writes:
>  >  > >  >  > On Thursday 27 August 2009, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
>  >  > >  >  > > On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:34:53 +0200 (CEST), Rafael J. Wysocki 
> wrote:
>  >  > >  >  > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known 
> regressions
>  >  > >  >  > > > from 2.6.30.  Please verify if it still should be listed 
> and let me know
>  >  > >  >  > > > (either way).
>  >  > >  >  > > > 
>  >  > >  >  > > > 
>  >  > >  >  > > > Bug-Entry   : 
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D14015
>  >  > >  >  > > > Subject             : pty regressed again, breaking expect 
> and gcc's testsuite
>  >  > >  >  > > > Submitter   : Mikael Pettersson <[email protected]>
>  >  > >  >  > > > Date                : 2009-08-14 23:41 (12 days old)
>  >  > >  >  > > > References  : 
> http://marc.info/?l=3Dlinux-kernel&m=3D125029329805643&w=3D4
>  >  > >  >  > > 
>  >  > >  >  > > Not fixed. With 2.6.31-rc7 I'm still seeing repeatable 
> testsuite
>  >  > >  >  > > failures on powerpc64. Reverting to 2.6.30 makes the failures 
> go away.
>  >  > >  >  > 
>  >  > >  >  > Thanks for the update.
>  >  > >  >  > 
>  >  > >  >  > I guess 2.6.31-rc8 doesn't make any difference, does it?
>  >  > >  > 
>  >  > >  > I've scheduled a number of gcc bootstraps and testsuite runs
>  >  > >  > with -rc8 on x86, powerpc64, and arm. I'll post an update in
>  >  > >  > a day or so.
>  >  > > 
>  >  > > 2.6.31-rc8 results in bogus testsuite failures on all three platforms.
>  >  > 
>  >  > That may be a result of the known inotify borkage in -rc8 that has been 
> fixed
>  >  > in the current Linus' tree.
>  > 
>  > No, it's the same old semi-random pty breakage. My kernels are built
>  > without inotify.
>  > 
>  > A bisection has identified Alan's
>  > 
>  > pty: Rework the pty layer to use the normal buffering logic
>  > d945cb9cce20ac7143c2de8d88b187f62db99bdc 
>  > 
>  > as the culprit. This patch introduces a massive number of bogus
>  > failures in the gcc testsuite. Subsequent pty/tty patches do fix
>  > most of those failures, but clearly not all.
> 
> Starting with 2.6.31-rc8 and reverting
> 
> 85dfd81dc57e8183a277ddd7a56aa65c96f3f487 pty: fix data loss when stopped 
> (^S/^Q)
> d945cb9cce20ac7143c2de8d88b187f62db99bdc pty: Rework the pty layer to use the 
> normal buffering logic
> 
> in that order gives me a kernel that works on both x86 and powerpc64.
> 
> So the bug is definitely limited to the pty buffering logic change.

Thanks a lot for this information, adding somme CCs to the list.

Best,
Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to