linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.30rc7: ksoftirqd CPU saturation (x86-64 only, not x86-32) (e1000e-related?)

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: <87ljoczu3p.fsf@hades.wkstn.nix>
Date:	Mon, 01 Jun 2009 01:16:26 +0100
From:	Nix <nix@...eri.org.uk>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.30rc7: ksoftirqd CPU saturation (x86-64 only, not x86-32) (e1000e-related?)

On 1 Jun 2009, Andrew Morton said:

> Let's cc netdev on this.
>
> Presumably it is a post-2.6.29 regression.

I don't know: the earliest kernel this machine has ever run was
2.6.30rc5, and this failing 2.6.30rc7 kernel is the first 64-bit kernel
I've ever run on it. So currently I have one single data point.

I plan to try out 2.6.29 (and back to 2.6.25 or thereabouts) tomorrow
and see if it ever worked: if it did I'll bisect for it (rendered tricky
by the out-of-tree e1000e driver, but doable: it would be easier if I
had a clue where the e1000-devel git tree is, if anywhere, but I still
have no idea despite considerable searching).

It seems to go wrong instantly, so replication is trivial, and this
system can compile a kernel in slightly under a minute, so it shouldn't
take too long to complete the bisection.
--
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/