[00:10] <slangasek> jsalisbury: e63a94f12b5fc67b2b92a89d4058e7a9021e900e is good
[00:12] <slangasek> jsalisbury: so that's a merge commit, and 'git bisect' stops there for me?
[00:14] <jsalisbury> slangasek, Yeah, your right.  The bisect usually goes down into a merge, but it isn't in this case.  
[00:14] <jsalisbury> slangasek, I'll look at that merge and see if there are commits in it that stuck out and could be the fix
[00:15] <jsalisbury> slangasek, If nothting sticks out, I can manually bisect in that merge I suppose.
[00:15] <slangasek> jsalisbury: k.  it's "only" 105 commits on the tty stack, 4kloc :)
[00:15] <jsalisbury> slangasek, heh, yeah
[00:17] <jsalisbury> slangasek, I hate when bisects don't have a easy and happy ending.  I'll let you know when a kernel is ready.  May not be until the morning though.
[00:18] <slangasek> jsalisbury: no problem
[00:19] <slangasek> 979990c6284814617d8f2179d197f72ff62b5d85 looks vaguely interesting
[00:20] <slangasek> by and large, the merge commit's description of being "mostly serial" is supported by the commit log
[00:22] <jsalisbury> slangasek, that was cc'd to stable, so it's on its way to us anyway.  I could build a test kenel with it just for the heck of it.
[01:22] <jsalisbury> slangasek, if you want to test it out, I built an Artful kernel with a pick of commit 979990c6284814617d8f2179d197f72ff62b5d85
[01:23] <jsalisbury> slangasek, if that's not it, I'll dig further into that merge
[03:09] <slangasek> jsalisbury: that one didn't do the trick either :/
[11:15] <jsalisbury> slangasek, I'll look at that merge closeer and manually bisect it if needed.
[11:18] <apw> jsalisbury, is there any reason you canont just start a new bisct between the first commit on the branch and the git mergebase of the two parents of the merge ?
[11:55] <jsalisbury> apw, I'll give that a try.  I'm not sure whey the bisect didn't go down into the merge.
[11:56] <apw> no indeed that is idd
[11:59] <TJ-> maybe it was an octopus merge (3 or more branches at once) ?
[12:02] <jsalisbury> TJ-, maybe.  apw, it looks like your method shoudl work
[12:11] <jsalisbury> slangasek I started a new "Reverse" bisect of just the merge using:
[12:11] <jsalisbury> # good: [1a3b85ea36d38d5732fdd86b321b10bcaeb53512] Merge tag 'usb-4.14-rc1' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/usb
[12:11] <jsalisbury> # bad: [3840ed9548f778717aaab5eab744da798c3ea055] tty: goldfish: Implement support for kernel 'earlycon' parameter
[12:11] <jsalisbury> I built the first test kernel, up to the following commit:
[12:11] <jsalisbury> ef954844c7ace62f773f4f23e28d2d915adc419f
[17:57] <slangasek> jsalisbury: ef954844c7ace62f773f4f23e28d2d915adc419f bad
[18:00] <jsalisbury> slangasek, thanks, I'll build the next one.
[18:29] <jsalisbury> slangasek, kernel up to commit ec085c5a51b768947ca481f90b66653e36b3c566 is ready
[18:44] <slangasek> jsalisbury: ec085c5a51b768947ca481f90b66653e36b3c566 bad
[18:44] <jsalisbury> slangasek, ack. I'll build the next one
[18:54] <jsalisbury> slangasek, test kernel up to commit cdb939456f81878cda1f31ba0ef1a3b1d7be07e8 is ready.
[19:57] <slangasek> jsalisbury: cdb939456f81878cda1f31ba0ef1a3b1d7be07e8 bad
[20:08] <jsalisbury> slangasek, ack, building the next one
[20:18] <jsalisbury> slangasek, commit 2ce8008711e4837c11e99a94df55406085d0d098 is ready.
[21:14] <slangasek> jsalisbury: 2ce8008711e4837c11e99a94df55406085d0d098 bad
[21:14] <jsalisbury> slangasek, ack, I'll build the next one
[21:25] <jsalisbury> slangasek, commit d01c3289e7d68162e32bc08c2b65dd1a216a7ef8 is ready.
[21:29] <slangasek> jsalisbury: not visible on http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~jsalisbury/lp1724911/ 
[21:44] <jsalisbury> slangasek, sorry, should be there now.
[21:47] <slangasek> jsalisbury: looks good, thanks
[22:14] <slangasek> jsalisbury: d01c3289e7d68162e32bc08c2b65dd1a216a7ef8 bad
[22:15] <jsalisbury> slangasek, ack
[22:38] <jsalisbury> slangasek, commit ae28d7402a7e7cf3dd0da1f2eb6a52b337873e08 is ready
[23:26] <slangasek> jsalisbury: eventually one of these kernels is going to be good again, right? :) ae28d7402a7e7cf3dd0da1f2eb6a52b337873e08 bad
[23:28] <slangasek> jsalisbury: so I went back to the bug log and noticed you listed your bisect as between 1a3b85ea36d38d5732fdd86b321b10bcaeb53512 and 3840ed9548f778717aaab5eab744da798c3ea055 but both of those commits were bad
[23:51] <jsalisbury> slangasek, hmm, I must have gotten the merge commits wrong from e63a94f12b.  I'll investigate a bit and ask apw if I can't figure it out.