On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 9:51 PM Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Now, with non-repeatable boot failures, anything is possible, and Sami > does mention 6.1.30 as good (implying that 6.1.31 might not be - and > that is when the backport happened). > > So it's certainly worth checking out, but on the face of it, that > bisection result doesn't really support the bug being due to > e9523a0d81899 (which came *after* e7b813b32a42). Sami - awaiting your results.
