Here the bisect results:
db4be873d312576c6971da15a38e056017a406b8 is the first bad commit
commit db4be873d312576c6971da15a38e056017a406b8
Author: Gerd Hoffmann
Date: Thu Jan 12 14:26:13 2012 +0100
usb: maintain async packet list per endpoint
Maintain a list of async packets per endp
On 2012-02-02 15:07, Erik Rull wrote:
>
> On February 2, 2012 at 2:21 PM Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-02 14:18, Erik Rull wrote:
>>>
>>> On February 1, 2012 at 11:05 PM Erik Rull
> wrote:
>>>
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-02-01 13:52, Erik Rull wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
On February 2, 2012 at 2:21 PM Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-02-02 14:18, Erik Rull wrote:
> >
> > On February 1, 2012 at 11:05 PM Erik Rull
wrote:
> >
> >> Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>> On 2012-02-01 13:52, Erik Rull wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> first of all I'm a bit confused:
>
>
On 2012-02-02 14:18, Erik Rull wrote:
>
> On February 1, 2012 at 11:05 PM Erik Rull wrote:
>
>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> On 2012-02-01 13:52, Erik Rull wrote:
Hi all,
first of all I'm a bit confused:
What is the difference between qemu with command line option
> --enable-
On February 1, 2012 at 11:05 PM Erik Rull wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > On 2012-02-01 13:52, Erik Rull wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> first of all I'm a bit confused:
> >>
> >> What is the difference between qemu with command line option
--enable-kvm
> >> and qemu-kvm?
> >> It seems to be a di
Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2012-02-01 13:52, Erik Rull wrote:
Hi all,
first of all I'm a bit confused:
What is the difference between qemu with command line option --enable-kvm
and qemu-kvm?
It seems to be a difference in code so far, from the performance point of
view it seems to be the same...
On 2012-02-01 13:52, Erik Rull wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> first of all I'm a bit confused:
>
> What is the difference between qemu with command line option --enable-kvm
> and qemu-kvm?
> It seems to be a difference in code so far, from the performance point of
> view it seems to be the same...
>
> No
On February 1, 2012 at 5:01 PM Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-02-01 16:43, Erik Rull wrote:
> > On February 1, 2012 at 3:42 PM Jan Kiszka
wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-02-01 15:02, Erik Rull wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On February 1, 2012 at 2:40 PM Avi Kivity wrote:
> >>>
> On 02/01/2012 02:52 PM, Erik R
On 2012-02-01 16:43, Erik Rull wrote:
> On February 1, 2012 at 3:42 PM Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-01 15:02, Erik Rull wrote:
>>>
>>> On February 1, 2012 at 2:40 PM Avi Kivity wrote:
>>>
On 02/01/2012 02:52 PM, Erik Rull wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> first of all I'm a bit confus
On February 1, 2012 at 3:42 PM Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-02-01 15:02, Erik Rull wrote:
> >
> > On February 1, 2012 at 2:40 PM Avi Kivity wrote:
> >
> >> On 02/01/2012 02:52 PM, Erik Rull wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> first of all I'm a bit confused:
> >>>
> >>> What is the difference betw
On 2012-02-01 15:02, Erik Rull wrote:
>
> On February 1, 2012 at 2:40 PM Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>> On 02/01/2012 02:52 PM, Erik Rull wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> first of all I'm a bit confused:
>>>
>>> What is the difference between qemu with command line option
> --enable-kvm
>>> and qemu-kvm?
>>>
On February 1, 2012 at 2:40 PM Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 02/01/2012 02:52 PM, Erik Rull wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > first of all I'm a bit confused:
> >
> > What is the difference between qemu with command line option
--enable-kvm
> > and qemu-kvm?
> > It seems to be a difference in code so far, fr
On 02/01/2012 02:52 PM, Erik Rull wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> first of all I'm a bit confused:
>
> What is the difference between qemu with command line option --enable-kvm
> and qemu-kvm?
> It seems to be a difference in code so far, from the performance point of
> view it seems to be the same...
The d
Hi all,
first of all I'm a bit confused:
What is the difference between qemu with command line option --enable-kvm
and qemu-kvm?
It seems to be a difference in code so far, from the performance point of
view it seems to be the same...
Now my issue that lead me to a git bisect on qemu-kvm:
The f
On January 30, 2012 at 3:48 PM Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-01-30 15:17, Erik Rull wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On January 30, 2012 at 2:48 PM Jan Kiszka
wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-01-30 14:17, Erik Rull wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On January 30, 2012 at 12:52 PM Jan Kiszka
> > wrote:
> >>>
>
On 2012-01-30 15:17, Erik Rull wrote:
>
>
>
> On January 30, 2012 at 2:48 PM Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
>> On 2012-01-30 14:17, Erik Rull wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On January 30, 2012 at 12:52 PM Jan Kiszka
> wrote:
>>>
On 2012-01-30 12:34, Erik Rull wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> I'm sorry, but
On January 30, 2012 at 2:48 PM Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-01-30 14:17, Erik Rull wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On January 30, 2012 at 12:52 PM Jan Kiszka
wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-01-30 12:34, Erik Rull wrote:
> >>> Hi Jan,
> >>>
> >>> I'm sorry, but this does not solve my issue. I applied the patch
On 2012-01-30 14:17, Erik Rull wrote:
>
>
>
> On January 30, 2012 at 12:52 PM Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
>> On 2012-01-30 12:34, Erik Rull wrote:
>>> Hi Jan,
>>>
>>> I'm sorry, but this does not solve my issue. I applied the patch and
>>> crosschecked that the resulting file looks fine.
>>>
>>> The f
On January 30, 2012 at 12:52 PM Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-01-30 12:34, Erik Rull wrote:
> > Hi Jan,
> >
> > I'm sorry, but this does not solve my issue. I applied the patch and
> > crosschecked that the resulting file looks fine.
> >
> > The final function looks like:
> >
> > static void sdl
On 2012-01-30 12:34, Erik Rull wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> I'm sorry, but this does not solve my issue. I applied the patch and
> crosschecked that the resulting file looks fine.
>
> The final function looks like:
>
> static void sdl_grab_start(void)
> {
> /*
> * If the application is not active, do n
On January 28, 2012 at 3:52 PM Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-01-28 14:01, Erik Rull wrote:
> > Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2012-01-28 13:39, Erik Rull wrote:
> >>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-01-27 23:52, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>>
On 2012-01-28 14:01, Erik Rull wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2012-01-28 13:39, Erik Rull wrote:
>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2012-01-27 23:52, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-01-26 14:10, Erik Rull wrote:
>> I assume from these results that the gui_grab is never set to 1 when
>> having
Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2012-01-28 13:39, Erik Rull wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2012-01-27 23:52, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2012-01-26 14:10, Erik Rull wrote:
I assume from these results that the gui_grab is never set to 1 when
having
entered the window in windowed mode with the cursor.
Maybe that's
On 2012-01-28 13:39, Erik Rull wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2012-01-27 23:52, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> On 2012-01-26 14:10, Erik Rull wrote:
I assume from these results that the gui_grab is never set to 1 when
having
entered the window in windowed mode with the cursor.
May
Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2012-01-27 23:52, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2012-01-26 14:10, Erik Rull wrote:
I assume from these results that the gui_grab is never set to 1 when having
entered the window in windowed mode with the cursor.
Maybe that's why the sdl_grab_start() is called so often.
It seems th
On 2012-01-27 23:52, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-01-26 14:10, Erik Rull wrote:
>> I assume from these results that the gui_grab is never set to 1 when having
>> entered the window in windowed mode with the cursor.
>>
>> Maybe that's why the sdl_grab_start() is called so often.
>>
>> It seems that
On 2012-01-26 14:10, Erik Rull wrote:
> I assume from these results that the gui_grab is never set to 1 when having
> entered the window in windowed mode with the cursor.
>
> Maybe that's why the sdl_grab_start() is called so often.
>
> It seems that the condition in sdl_grab_start()
> (SDL_WM_
On 2012-01-26 14:10, Erik Rull wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
>
>
> here the results of the sdl printfs.
>
>
>
> First of all the modified code:
>
>
>
> #include
>
> #define NO_DEBUG_PATHS 3
> int paths[NO_DEBUG_PATHS] = {0,0,0};
> int last_sec = 0;
> struct timeval tv;
>
> static void handle_mouse
Hi Jan,
here the results of the sdl printfs.
First of all the modified code:
#include
#define NO_DEBUG_PATHS 3
int paths[NO_DEBUG_PATHS] = {0,0,0};
int last_sec = 0;
struct timeval tv;
static
Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2012-01-25 12:48, erik.r...@rdsoftware.de wrote:
Hi Jan,
You should CC me then... :)
I will do that for upcoming emails.
This little change fixes my problem with the usb-tablet update rate.
Can you please verify if this has some side effects?
Surely as it disables
On 2012-01-25 12:48, erik.r...@rdsoftware.de wrote:
> Hi Jan,
You should CC me then... :)
>
> This little change fixes my problem with the usb-tablet update rate.
>
> Can you please verify if this has some side effects?
Surely as it disables in general valid code, namely the auto-grabbing
feat
Hi Jan,
This little change fixes my problem with the usb-tablet update rate.
Can you please verify if this has some side effects?
If not, can you post a real patch?
I don't know how to handle the whole patching and committing stuff exactly.
Thanks.
Erik
--
diff --git a/ui/sdl.c b/ui/sdl.c
i
On 2012-01-24 19:55, Erik Rull wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2012-01-24 18:24, Erik Rull wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I assume that I found a possible source of the bad usbtablet update
>>> rate.
>>>
>>> I did some git bisectioning but I didn't get a usable result due to too
>>> many merges (or ma
Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2012-01-24 18:24, Erik Rull wrote:
Hi all,
I assume that I found a possible source of the bad usbtablet update rate.
I did some git bisectioning but I didn't get a usable result due to too
many merges (or maybe my little knowledge to git), so I proceeded with some
manual b
On 2012-01-24 18:24, Erik Rull wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I assume that I found a possible source of the bad usbtablet update rate.
>
> I did some git bisectioning but I didn't get a usable result due to too
> many merges (or maybe my little knowledge to git), so I proceeded with some
> manual bisect
Hi all,
I assume that I found a possible source of the bad usbtablet update rate.
I did some git bisectioning but I didn't get a usable result due to too
many merges (or maybe my little knowledge to git), so I proceeded with some
manual bisectioning by manually selecting commits and tested the
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 05:51:52PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 02:11:48PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> > I've not looked into this at all, it's just a report that something
> > seems to be "up". I will try to git bisect this later if no one spots
> > anyth
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 02:11:48PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> I've not looked into this at all, it's just a report that something
> seems to be "up". I will try to git bisect this later if no one spots
> anything obvious.
>
> The next operation after insmod virtio_blk would be insmod_v
38 matches
Mail list logo
