Btw, this is particularly true if it takes you potentially hours to test
something like 2.5.51 for stability, but you can reboot 2.5.59 at will in
In that case, you can test several vrsions of "2.5.59 + partial -mjb
patches" much more quickly than you can walk backwards in 2.5.x, and try
to pinpoint the "this part of -mjb makes it much less likely to reboot".
Also, with the -mjb patch there are some new configuration options. For
example, CONFIG_100HZ on -mjb has very different behaviour than a plain
2.5.59 kernel that defaults to 1kHz timer clock, and maybe the reason -mjb
seems more stable is that you may have selected a configuration option
that made -mjb act differently.
Regardless, it would be very interesting to hear what the -mjb split-down
results would be. Even if the answer might be "at 1kHz timer it is
unstable, at 100Hz it is stable" (and if that were to be it, then you'd
have to walk backwards to 2.5.24 to find the old 2.5.x kernel that had a
slow tick rate).
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/