linux-kernel - RE: VFs go missing with latest kernel

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: <C5551D9AAB213A418B7FD5E4A6F30A0702F66ADF@ORSMSX106.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 1 Feb 2012 17:47:30 +0000
From:	"Rose, Gregory V" <gregory.v.rose@...el.com>
To:	"Rose, Gregory V" <gregory.v.rose@...el.com>,
	'David Ahern' <daahern@...co.com>
CC:	'LKML' <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: VFs go missing with latest kernel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rose, Gregory V
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 5:03 PM
> To: David Ahern
> Cc: LKML
> Subject: RE: VFs go missing with latest kernel
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Ahern [mailto:daahern@...co.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 4:50 PM
> > To: Rose, Gregory V
> > Cc: LKML
> > Subject: Re: VFs go missing with latest kernel
> >
> > On 01/31/2012 05:43 PM, Rose, Gregory V wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Back to the missing VF problem: reverting the patch I mentioned
> before
> > >> and my VM boots up fine with the even-numbered VFs assigned to it.
> > >
> > > OK, thanks... I was staring at the dmesg output you sent me and it is
> > odd because the even numbered VFs that go missing are there when you set
> > their MAC addresses.  See output below the dotted line after my reply.
> >
> > Ah, I think I confused you. The VFs for the first 2 ports (ie., the
> > first 14 VFs) are seen fine; I only showed the VFs for the second 2
> > ports -- which are missing the even number.
> >
> > So, in summary I am missing 7 VFs all associated with the even numbers
> > on the last ports of a quad port card.
> 
> OK, thanks for the clarification.  But it still shows that all 28 VFs
> exist while their MAC addresses are being set but then at some point
> subsequent to that 7 of them on the port belonging to PCI device 07:00.0
> disappear for some reason.
> 
> I'll see what I can find.

I found this in the log file you sent me.  I had missed it yesterday.

[   15.835223] igb 0000:07:00.0: 7 pre-allocated VFs found - override max_vfs setting of 7
[   15.835393] igb 0000:07:00.0: 7 VFs allocated

I think that must be a bug in the code that searches for VFs already allocated and is the source of your problem.  I'll keep you updated on what I find but it has to be a bug in the VF device lookups.

- Greg

--
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/