<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEEDINFO " title="NEEDINFO --- - [HSW-M Bisected]multiple small screen shows while running testdisplay -f / fastboot=1 pfit bug" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76153#c16">Comment # 16</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEEDINFO " title="NEEDINFO --- - [HSW-M Bisected]multiple small screen shows while running testdisplay -f / fastboot=1 pfit bug" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76153">bug 76153</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:gordon.jin@intel.com" title="Gordon Jin <gordon.jin@intel.com>"> Gordon Jin</a> <pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=76153#c15">comment #15</a>) > Hi Gordon, > > Reverting the bisected commit is the best way to make sure the bisect result > makes sense. git bisect often ends up in a commit that is not the culprit > and knowing if a git revert fixes the issues is a definitive way to be sure. > > I'd argue that should be the last step in the bisect script, give this info. > Sometimes a git revert is not possible or easy though, in which case we > can't do that. Damien, I fully agree with you that reverting the bisected commit is the best way to ensure the bisect result (although it doesn't always apply). But in this case, I don't think Imre is doubting the bisect result. Instead, the bug has been fixed, and he wants to know which commit fixes the bug. I'd check if this is really necessary as it won't be trivial effort (as the test is not automated so auto-bisect won't help here).</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> <li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>