linux-kernel - RE: [REGRESSION] 2.6.24-rc7: e1000: Detected Tx Unit Hang

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <36D9DB17C6DE9E40B059440DB8D95F52043A156F@orsmsx418.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Sun, 20 Jan 2008 01:20:11 -0800
From:	"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
To:	"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, <Robert.Olsson@...a.slu.se>
Cc:	<elendil@...net.nl>, <slavon@...telecom.ru>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [REGRESSION] 2.6.24-rc7: e1000: Detected Tx Unit Hang

David Miller wrote:
> From: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@...a.slu.se>
> Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:00:57 +0100
> 
>>  I don't understand the idea with semaphore for enabling/disabling
>>  irq's either the overall logic must safer/better without it.
> 
> They must have had code paths where they didn't know if IRQs were
> enabled or not already, so they tried to create something which
> approximates the:
> 
> 	local_irq_save(flags);
> 	local_irq_restore(flags);
> 
> constructs we have for CPU interrupts, so they could go:
> 
> 	e1000_irq_disable();
> 	/* ... */
> 	e1000_irq_enable();
> 
> and this would work even if the caller was running
> with e1000 interrupts disabled already.
> 
> Or, something like that... it is indeed confusing.
> 
> Anyways, yes it's totally bogus and should be removed.

I agree, bogus, and in fact I've already removed it from our development
version of ixgbe.  Right now I wanted to report I can't remove e1000 at
all on 2.6.24-rc8+git

I continually get the
 kernel: unregister_netdevice: waiting for eth2 to become free. Usage
count = 1

Where 2.6.24-rc5 e1000 is okay still.  Seems like maybe we are still
missing a netif_rx_complete or a napi_disable somewhere.

I don't think this problem has anything to do with the irq_sem right
now.  Something is still badly broken.  I am just using the interface
regularly (no heavy load) and I can't unload the module.

Jesse
--
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/