On 01.11.24 12:59, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Thanks for this. A couple of comments. yw; thx for your feedback! > On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 07:17:06 +0100 Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [...] >> +Bisecting linux-next >> +-------------------- >> + >> +If you face a problem only happening in linux-next, bisect between the >> +linux-next branches 'stable' and 'master'. The following commands will start >> +the process for a linux-next tree you added as a remote called 'next':: >> + >> + git bisect start >> + git bisect good next/stable >> + git bisect bad next/master >> + >> +The 'stable' branch refers to the state of linux-mainline the current > ^ > that the current Ohh, I thought such a "that" would be optional here, but I'm not a native speaker, so I guess I was wrong. >> +linux-next release (found in the 'master' branch) is based on -- the former >> +thus should be free of any problems that show up in -next, but not in Linus' >> +tree. > > As you say, 'stable' only works for the current linux-next release. If > you are trying to bisect a previous release, you can always find the > SHA1 associated with the base of any linux-next release using "grep > origin Next/SHA1s". Not sure how useful that is. Hmmm. Not sure. Open for opinions here. But right now I tend to think: nice to know, but not relevant enough for this text, as most people want to check if latest -next is still affected -- so why then bisect with a older -next release? Ciao, Thorsten
