Re: Release Engineering Status Report

From: Bill Moran (wmoran_at_potentialtech.com)
Date: 09/16/03

  • Next message: Daniel Eischen: "Re: scsi_cd or atapicam crash in current."
    Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:55:49 -0400
    To: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org>
    
    

    Scott Long wrote:
    > Bruce Evans wrote:
    >
    >> On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
    >>
    >>> PAE MFC brought an incredible instability to stable branch. It
    >>> affects 100% of our user community especially when we issued several
    >>> SAs since PAE commit. They often can't switch to RELENG_4_x security
    >>> branches because even RELENG_4_8 misses several critical non-security
    >>> fixes.
    >>
    >> I merged PAE into my version of -current a bit at a time and didn't
    >> notice any problems (with PAE not actually configured) despite having
    >> some large logical inconsistencies from not having all of it. Most
    >> of the global changes had no effect since they just changed the names
    >> of some typedefs without changing the underlying types in the !PAE
    >> case. So I suspect that any instabilities in RELENG_4 in the !PAE
    >> case are indirectly related to PAE and/or localized and thus easy to
    >> find and fix.
    >>
    >> Bruce
    >
    > Agreed. PAE was merged into -stable in three steps. Backing out the
    > third step and leaving the first two steps removes the instability.
    > Unfortunately, it was the third step that also was the most complex.
    > In any case, we have 2 weeks to find the resolution before the decision
    > must be made on keeping or tossing PAE. Since PAE is a *highly*
    > sought after feature, it would be doing a disservice to our user base
    > to remove it without putting in some effort to fix it.

    If someone who was involved in this would publish the date on which that
    last commit was made, people who are experiencing problems, but wish to
    stay as close to -STABLE as possible can use cvsup to revert their trees
    to a date immediately prior to the commit.

    This will solve both problems for now: i.e. the problem of users wanting
    the bugfixes/new features of -STABLE will have a target they can cvsup to
    that is reliable, while the developers can continue to pursue their goal
    of having PAE in 4.9.

    -- 
    Bill Moran
    Potential Technologies
    http://www.potentialtech.com
    _______________________________________________
    freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
    http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
    To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
    

  • Next message: Daniel Eischen: "Re: scsi_cd or atapicam crash in current."

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Release Engineering Status Report
      ... :Bruce Evans wrote: ... :>>PAE MFC brought an incredible instability to stable branch. ... :third step and leaving the first two steps removes the instability. ... Scott, ...
      (freebsd-current)
    • Re: Release Engineering Status Report
      ... Bruce Evans wrote: ... >>PAE MFC brought an incredible instability to stable branch. ... >>affects 100% of our user community especially when we issued several ...
      (freebsd-current)
    • Re: Release Engineering Status Report
      ... I was one the people who were experiencing stability problems after the ... PAE commit. ... I had several unexpected panics and could provoke panics ...
      (freebsd-current)
    • Re: Release Engineering Status Report
      ... I was one the people who were experiencing stability problems after the ... PAE commit. ... I had several unexpected panics and could provoke panics ...
      (freebsd-stable)
    • Re: Regression in 2.6.25-rc3: s2ram segfaults before suspending
      ... that I cannot make the problem go away by reverting the current code ... my guess would be that it's this commit that causes it: ... (Thats just a wild guess to explain why I'm the only one ... PAE activates NX on 32-bit. ...
      (Linux-Kernel)