[Bug 20771] general: 2.6.12-10 regressions from 2.6.12-9

[bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.ubuntu.com]

Please do not reply to this email.  You can add comments at
http://bugzilla.ubuntu.com/show_bug.cgi?id=20771
Ubuntu | linux





------- Additional Comments From fabbione at ubuntu.com  2005-12-22 05:57 UTC -------
(In reply to comment #11)
> Ben / Fabio,
> Some more information for you. On Monday [19th] I tried another installation of
> 5.10, this time on a different AMD64 SMP architecture. My original post was
> based on a struggle with a Tyan Thunder K8W running with two Opteron 250's. On
> Monday I successfully completed an SMP installation on my other machine, an
> A-Bit AV8 Motherboard with an Athlon64X2 4200 CPU. To my surprise this worked
> perfectly and I write this to you know from this same hardware. I am running
> with kernel image
> 
> 2.6.12-10-amd64-k8-smp
> 
> and to my surprise and delight nothing else was necessary in order to get the
> system to accept this image. This K8 kernel may still bork on my Opteron box
> [will try at the weekend, will need a complete rebuild] but at least I have one
> SMP system back  ;o)
> 
> I'll try testing the other kernels and report that, too.

OK! I will try to prepare the same 6 test kernels for amd64 too. The idea is that
i stripped the security patch with a specific order. Once we get to the kernel
number that will stop working, I will be able to prepare another test kernel
to isolate the fault to one patch (theoretically). There is also the possibility
that the interaction between 2 patches is making all this mess.
Also.. the funny part is that NONE of the patches are touching stuff like SMP
or ACPI or k7/k8 specific bits. so the hunt to the problem is complex.

We do really appreciate the help with your testing!

Fabio

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.ubuntu.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.