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  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]
Date:	Mon, 31 Aug 2009 23:33:16 -0400
From:	David Dillow <>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <>
Cc:	Francois Romieu <>,
	Michael Riepe <>,
	Michael Buesch <>,
	Rui Santos <>,
	Michael B??ker <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] r8169: Reduce looping in the interrupt handler.

On Sun, 2009-08-30 at 13:53 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Francois Romieu <> writes:
> > David Dillow <> :
> > [...]
> >> It'll be this weekend, but I can see cases where it can lock my chip up
> >> -- they should be rare, but then I thought your case would be extremely
> >> rare...
> >
> > I don't get it.
> >
> > Can you elaborate the relevant cases or give some sample scenarios for
> > them ?
> I think David is referring to the fact that in the NAPI loop there is
> nothing that acks everything.

That was my concern, yes.

I've not been able to reproduce my lockups under medium testing with
Francois's patch applied, so I'm a little more comfortable with it.

At the same time, I'm worried that the timing just changed enough to
make it harder to trigger, as was the case when I did the patch IIRC.
The kernel's interrupt handling changed in a manner that made it much
easier to hit about that time. The testing I did in May pointed strongly
at us failing to ACK an interrupt source, causing the MSI generation to
stop, so I need to think about things some more.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists