forked from Minki/linux
Documentation/BUG-HUNTING whitespace cleanup
Just a little whitespace cleanup patch for Documentation/BUG-HUNTING Signed-off-by: Clemens Koller <clemens.koller@anagramm.de> Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
06c93e8757
commit
d81919c9c2
@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ Finding it the old way
|
||||
|
||||
[Sat Mar 2 10:32:33 PST 1996 KERNEL_BUG-HOWTO lm@sgi.com (Larry McVoy)]
|
||||
|
||||
This is how to track down a bug if you know nothing about kernel hacking.
|
||||
This is how to track down a bug if you know nothing about kernel hacking.
|
||||
It's a brute force approach but it works pretty well.
|
||||
|
||||
You need:
|
||||
@ -66,12 +66,12 @@ You will then do:
|
||||
|
||||
. Rebuild a revision that you believe works, install, and verify that.
|
||||
. Do a binary search over the kernels to figure out which one
|
||||
introduced the bug. I.e., suppose 1.3.28 didn't have the bug, but
|
||||
introduced the bug. I.e., suppose 1.3.28 didn't have the bug, but
|
||||
you know that 1.3.69 does. Pick a kernel in the middle and build
|
||||
that, like 1.3.50. Build & test; if it works, pick the mid point
|
||||
between .50 and .69, else the mid point between .28 and .50.
|
||||
. You'll narrow it down to the kernel that introduced the bug. You
|
||||
can probably do better than this but it gets tricky.
|
||||
can probably do better than this but it gets tricky.
|
||||
|
||||
. Narrow it down to a subdirectory
|
||||
|
||||
@ -81,27 +81,27 @@ You will then do:
|
||||
directories:
|
||||
|
||||
Copy the non-working directory next to the working directory
|
||||
as "dir.63".
|
||||
as "dir.63".
|
||||
One directory at time, try moving the working directory to
|
||||
"dir.62" and mv dir.63 dir"time, try
|
||||
"dir.62" and mv dir.63 dir"time, try
|
||||
|
||||
mv dir dir.62
|
||||
mv dir.63 dir
|
||||
find dir -name '*.[oa]' -print | xargs rm -f
|
||||
|
||||
And then rebuild and retest. Assuming that all related
|
||||
changes were contained in the sub directory, this should
|
||||
isolate the change to a directory.
|
||||
changes were contained in the sub directory, this should
|
||||
isolate the change to a directory.
|
||||
|
||||
Problems: changes in header files may have occurred; I've
|
||||
found in my case that they were self explanatory - you may
|
||||
found in my case that they were self explanatory - you may
|
||||
or may not want to give up when that happens.
|
||||
|
||||
. Narrow it down to a file
|
||||
|
||||
- You can apply the same technique to each file in the directory,
|
||||
hoping that the changes in that file are self contained.
|
||||
|
||||
hoping that the changes in that file are self contained.
|
||||
|
||||
. Narrow it down to a routine
|
||||
|
||||
- You can take the old file and the new file and manually create
|
||||
@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ You will then do:
|
||||
that makes the difference.
|
||||
|
||||
Finally, you take all the info that you have, kernel revisions, bug
|
||||
description, the extent to which you have narrowed it down, and pass
|
||||
description, the extent to which you have narrowed it down, and pass
|
||||
that off to whomever you believe is the maintainer of that section.
|
||||
A post to linux.dev.kernel isn't such a bad idea if you've done some
|
||||
work to narrow it down.
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user