[00:54] <stgraber> hey there, just tried using a standard generic kernel on my wandboard (imx6) and I'm getting this in dmesg followed pretty shortly by a full system hang: http://paste.ubuntu.com/6216221/
[00:55] <stgraber> that's with the latest saucy kernel though I actually never managed to get a stable distro kernel to work on that one
[00:55] <stgraber> taking the same 3.11 kernel built by fedora (so probably slightly different kernel config) works fine
[00:55] <stgraber> (but I'd rather use the Ubuntu one from the archive since it gives me aufs and overlayfs which are rather nice on a system I use as a buildd)
[00:58] <stgraber> infinity: not sure if that rings a bell ^
[00:59] <infinity> stgraber: I suspect you'll find that our kernel and fedora's differ a lot more than just in configs. :/
[00:59] <infinity> stgraber: But not familiar with that bug in particular, no.  My imx6 has been idle a while.
[01:00] <stgraber> yeah, I'm already trying to get a config diff here and it seems rather massive, then I have no idea how many patches fedora has on top of upstream
[01:00] <infinity> stgraber: Anyhow, file a bug, point to the sources matching the working Fedora kernel.  I suspect it might take someone with a bit of smarts very little time to diff A B, compare to backtrace, and see where we might have gone wrong.
[01:01] <stgraber> and the current upstream git is failing to build for me (fails in some devicetree code) so I can't test if 3.12-rc4 is any better
[01:21] <stgraber> bug 1237733
[01:21] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1237733 in linux (Ubuntu) "Kernel hangs on wandboard (freescale imx6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1237733
=== fmasi_afk is now known as fmasi
[11:59]  * henrix -> lunch
=== fmasi is now known as fmasi_afk
[12:36] <apw> * powerpc
[12:36] <apw>   blktap (2.0.90-2ubuntu1): blktap-utils
[12:36] <apw> bah
=== psivaa is now known as psivaa-afk
[14:28] <ppisati> why is there an ubuntu-desktop metapkg but no ubuntu-server metapkg?
[14:29] <ppisati> i see the edubuntu-server* but no ubuntu-server
[14:29] <ppisati> weird
[14:30] <ppisati> actually the edubuntu pkgs are not meta
=== psivaa-afk is now known as psivaa
=== ricmm_ is now known as ricmm
[15:09] <manjo> ppetraki, around ? 
[15:19] <ppetraki> manjo, uh yeah
[15:19] <manjo> oh
[15:19] <manjo> ppisati, around ? 
[15:20] <ppisati> manjo: what?
[15:21] <manjo> ppetraki, there is a thread with Andre ... seems like we need an option for virtio console 
[15:21] <manjo> ppisati, ^
[15:21] <ppisati> manjo: http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=ubuntu/ubuntu-saucy.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/master-next
[15:21] <ppisati> manjo: build it and check it out
[15:22] <manjo> awesome! thanks 
[15:44] <bjf> kamal, what's the story on bug 1162026 and bug 1163720 ?
[15:44] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1162026 in linux (Ubuntu Raring) "backlight not adjustable after screen turns off and then back on" [Medium,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1162026
[15:44] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1163720 in Linux "Brightness control broken on XPS13 with 3.8.0-16 and 3.8.0-22" [Medium,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1163720
[15:45]  * kamal throws self from top of nearest spire . . .
[15:46]  * ppisati goes out for a bit
[15:47] <bjf> kamal, the "issue" for me is that these have been backported to precise, are in the precise changelog, there is no precise task on the bug and they need verification
[15:47] <bjf> kamal, i guess that should be "issues" :-P
[15:47] <manjo> ppisati, what branch is it on ? master-next ? 
[15:48] <ppisati> manjo: yes
[15:49] <kamal> bjf, ok, I think 1162026 is actually fixed nowadays (do you want to create a precise task for it?  same for quantal, I suppose?)
[15:50]  * ppisati notes my push-to-talk button is broken
[15:50] <ppisati> :P
[15:50] <bjf> kamal, i really just care that the "verification" tag gets added to the bug so that my report turns green 
[15:51] <kamal> bjf, 1163720 is an open issue (problem exists upstream also) ... I don't actually know if that bug can manifest on precise or not (I really don't even want to go find out).
[15:51] <kamal> bjf, oh, so you just want me to verify it then change the verification-{needed/done}-precise tag ?   no new task line required?
[15:52] <apw> if the bug is being released into precise in an lts kernel or similar then we should have tasks for it , so that launchpad has something to close
[15:52] <bjf> kamal, really both should happen but the tag is what i care most about
[15:52] <bjf> kamal, what apw said
[15:53] <apw> kamal, if you cannot nominate let me know what you need adding to what bug and i'll slam them in
[15:57] <bjf> kamal, i've taken care of adding the precise series to the bugs
[15:59] <kamal> bjf, ok thanks ... but I'm scratching my head about 1163720 ...  its certainly _not_ fixed at this point, but that fact should not make "this fix will be dropped from the source code, and this bug will be closed" occur!
[16:00] <kamal> bjf ... because "this fix" wasn't actually supposed to be the fix for that bug.
[16:02] <kamal> bjf, can I just take away "Fix Released" from 1163720?  (make it "In Progress" or something?) ... and remove the verification-needed-* tags?
[16:04] <bjf> kamal, well ... wasn't it fix released for raring? (or are you telling me it's not?)
[16:05] <apw> kamal, it ought to have only flagged up on bjfs list cause it has the bug number in the commit log right?
[16:05] <kamal> bjf, 1163720 is *not* fixed for any release at all
[16:05] <bjf> kamal, when i read that bug it looked like the commit fixed the original issue and then there was a new issue
[16:05] <apw> kamal, not even saucy ?
[16:05] <kamal> bjf, apw: the commit just shouldn't have referenced 1163720 at all
[16:06] <bjf> kamal, ok, fair enough
[16:06] <kamal> that bug does still exists in saucy (and upstream)
[16:06] <apw> ommit 8029954e6aa79d3fdc44b0353f6c9c4a8a656725
[16:06] <apw> Author: Kamal Mostafa <kamal@canonical.com>
[16:06] <apw> Date:   Fri Jul 19 15:02:01 2013 -0700
[16:06] <apw>     drm/i915: quirk no PCH_PWM_ENABLE for Dell XPS13 backlight
[16:06] <apw>     
[16:06] <apw> kamal, that one lists it 
[16:06] <apw> so the tools assume it is fixed
[16:06] <kamal> apw, that was a mistake on my part then.
[16:06] <bjf> kamal, then in that case i would think the right thing to do is to change the status to in-progress
[16:07] <apw> kamal, and we need to find out which bug you meant to put in there
[16:07] <bjf> kamal, and we'll just ignore the verification tags for this bug for this cycle
[16:07] <bjf> apw, that commit has 3 bugs listed i believe
[16:08] <kamal> apw, bjf, yes, that commit already has (also) the correct buglink
[16:08] <apw> bjf, yeah, it does indeed, there will be some fallout to fix the bugs it does not fix
[16:10] <kamal> bjf, ok, I will change 1163720 to "In Progress", and I think I should remove the verification tags from it also (yes?)
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
=== ChickenCutlass is now known as ChickenCutlass_l
[17:34]  * cking -> EOD
[17:56] <eridu> hey ubuntu kernellers, I'm tedks on launchpad, and I mistakenly closed this bug after corresponding with jsalisbury about it: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1133087
[17:56] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1133087 in linux (Ubuntu) "Ubuntu shows grains like screen after the splash from kernel (3.8.0-5)" [High,Fix released]
[17:57] <jsalisbury> eridu, ok.  I'll take a look.
[17:57] <eridu> it turns out that after installing the generic linux package and upgrading via apt, I installed the Ubuntu linux-image package, but wouldn't boot from it. So I made a mistake by closing that bug. With the latest (as of now) version of linux-image, I can't get to X on my system.
[17:58] <eridu> jsalisbury: thanks -- sorry for screwing this up, I'm still willing to test any bisected kernels you throw my way. and I'll double-check the uname this time :-)
[17:58] <jsalisbury> eridu, np.  I'll re-open the bug and add some comments.
[18:00] <eridu> awesome, thanks.
=== ChickenCutlass_l is now known as ChickenCutlass
[19:05]  * rtg -> lunch
[20:27] <rtg> bjf, care to chime in on this thread so I can get it out of my inbox ? https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2013-September/032841.html
[20:28] <bjf> looking, i thought it was handled so i deleted it already
[20:28] <rtg> bjf, just looking for the 2nd opinion
[20:32] <bjf> rtg, didn't we ask for more testing on that?
[20:32] <rtg> bjf, He says he tested on 4 other platforms
[20:34] <bjf> rtg, i ack'd it
[20:34] <rtg> bjf, k
[21:27]  * rtg -> EOD