Re: 4.18-rc* regression: x86-32 troubles (with timers?)

[Meelis Roos]

> Everything below here is is 'bad', which can be an indication that you
> misclassified one of
> the commits above as 'good' when it should have been 'bad'. The most likely
> explanations are that you either typed the 'git bisect good' by accident, or
> that the failure is not 100% reliable, and it sometimes works fine even on a
> broken kernel.
> 
> 0bc5fe857274133ca0 follows directly after 3a443bd6dd7c, "net/9p: correct the
> variable name in v9fs_get_trans_by_name() comment", which is marked "good",
> and can't really be good if 0bc5fe85727413 is bad and you are not using the
> 'qed' driver.
> 
> I'd retest 3a443bd6dd7c again to see if that should have been 'bad', and
> if it was, test v4.17-rc4, which is what the net-next tree was based on.

Yes, the same prebuilt 3a443bd6dd7c appeared to be bad when retesting 
it. Building v4.17-rc4 now.

-- 
Meelis Roos (mroos@xxxxxxxx)