lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 18:41:43 -0400 From: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com> To: "Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com> CC: Michel Lespinasse <walken@....org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, Jeb Cramer <cramerj@...el.com>, John Ronciak <john.ronciak@...el.com>, Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>, Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> Subject: Re: 24 lost ticks with 2.6.20.10 kernel Kok, Auke wrote: > Michel Lespinasse wrote: >> (I've added the E1000 maintainers to the thread as I found the issue >> seems to go away after I compile out that driver. For reference, I was >> trying to figure out why I lose exactly 24 ticks about every two >> seconds, as shown with report_lost_ticks. This is with a DQ965GF >> motherboard with onboard E1000). > > that's perfectly likely. The main issue is that we read the hardware > stats every two seconds and that can consume quite some time. It's > strange that you are losing that many ticks IMHO, but losing one or two > might very well be. > > We've been playing with all sorts of solutions to this problem and > haven't come up with a way to reduce the load of the system reading HW > stats, and it remains the most likely culprit, allthough I don't rule > out clean routines just yet. This could very well be exaggerated at > 100mbit speeds as well, I never looked at that. > > I've had good results with 2.6.21.1 (even running tickless :)) on these > NICs. Have you tried that yet? Maybe this could fix it in 2.6.20? (went into 2.6.21) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=46fcc86dd71d70211e965102fb69414c90381880 Commit: 46fcc86dd71d70211e965102fb69414c90381880 Parent: 2b858bd02ffca71391161f5709588fc70da79531 Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...dy.linux-foundation.org> AuthorDate: Thu Apr 19 18:21:01 2007 -0700 Committer: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...dy.linux-foundation.org> CommitDate: Thu Apr 19 18:21:01 2007 -0700 Revert "e1000: fix NAPI performance on 4-port adapters" This reverts commit 60cba200f11b6f90f35634c5cd608773ae3721b7. It's been linked to lockups of the e1000 hardware, see for example https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229603 but it's likely that the commit itself is not really introducing the bug, but just allowing an unrelated problem to rear its ugly head (ie one current working theory is that the code exposes us to a hardware race condition by decreasing the amount of time we spend in each NAPI poll cycle). We'll revert it until root cause is known. Intel has a repeatable reproduction on two different machines and bus traces of the hardware doing something bad. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists