Re: 2.6.16-rc4: known regressions

[Andrew Morton]

Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 12:51:01AM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 17:02 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > If you revert this one patch, on top of a clean 2.6.16-rc4, do things
> > > start working for you again?
> > 
> > Okey dokey, bisecting with mrproper took little longer than expected but
> > I found the bad changeset:

Thanks - it helps heaps.

> > 033b96fd30db52a710d97b06f87d16fc59fee0f1 is first bad commit
> > diff-tree 033b96fd30db52a710d97b06f87d16fc59fee0f1 (from 0f76e5acf9dc788e664056dda1e461f0bec93948)
> > Author: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@xxxxxxx>
> > Date:   Fri Nov 11 06:09:55 2005 +0100
> > 
> >     [PATCH] remove mount/umount uevents from superblock handling
> 
> Upgrade HAL, it's too old for that kernel.
> 

We broke back-compatibility.  The changelog _failed to tell us_ that we
were breaking back-compatibility.  The patch wouldn't have been applied if
we'd been told that.  At least, not without a lot of careful thought.

The fact that the changelog failed to tell us this makes one suspect that
the breakage was inadvertent.


So no, upgrading HAL is not a good answer.  Please fix the kernel.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/