perfect. Just the thing I would have proposed to do. So it is narrowed down
quite a bit. And with a bit more trials, this should lead to the offender.
> The problem occurred after :
> [290c263bf83cd78e53b1aa3b42165f588163f2be] switch jffs2 to inode->i_acl
Just to make sure not to misunderstand: this one is still good?
> and of course before:
> [936940a9c7e3d99b25859bf1ff140d8c2480183a] Merge branch 'for-linus' of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/viro/vfs-2.6
>
Assuming your thought if jfs is true (and this would make a log of sense as it
must be something not in the usual install, otherwise we should see much more
problems), there is one commit between your current place and the merge that
touches the jfs code. And that would be "helpers for acl caching + switch to
those"...
Christophe Dumez wrote:
> still using git-bisect.
Hi Christophe,
perfect. Just the thing I would have proposed to do. So it is narrowed down
quite a bit. And with a bit more trials, this should lead to the offender.
> The problem occurred after : 8e53b1aa3b42165 f588163f2be] switch jffs2 to inode->i_acl
> [290c263bf83cd7
Just to make sure not to misunderstand: this one is still good?
> and of course before: 9b25859bf1ff140 d8c2480183a] Merge branch 'for-linus' of kernel. org/pub/ scm/linux/ kernel/ git/viro/ vfs-2.6
> [936940a9c7e3d9
> git://git.
>
Assuming your thought if jfs is true (and this would make a log of sense as it
must be something not in the usual install, otherwise we should see much more
problems), there is one commit between your current place and the merge that
touches the jfs code. And that would be "helpers for acl caching + switch to
those"...