netdev - Re: [RFC] Re: 2.6.20->2.6.21 - networking dies after random time

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070809153039.GB4955@ff.dom.local>
Date:	Thu, 9 Aug 2007 17:30:39 +0200
From:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>,
	=?iso-8859-2?q? Marcin Ślusarz?= 
	<marcin.slusarz@...il.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jean-Baptiste Vignaud <vignaud@...dmail.fr>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	shemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-net <linux-net@...r.kernel.org>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Re: 2.6.20->2.6.21 - networking dies after random time

On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 06:04:34PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl> writes:
> 
> > It seems, we can start to think about some preferred solutions,
> > already. Here are some of my preliminary conclusions and suggestions.
> > 
> > The problem of timeouts with some 'older' network cards seems to hit
> > mainly x86_64 arch, and after diagnosing and testing (still beeing
> > done) it's caused by resending level type irqs.
> 
> i386 interrupt code should be similar, except for the lack of 
> per CPU irqs, but that shouldnt' affect resending.
> 
> > 
> > Possible solutions:
> 
> We should probably at least add some statistic counters to the
> standard kernel to try to detect these cases.
> 
> > It looks like these changes are needed for this x86_64 only,
> 
> Why?

Maybe I missed something, but considering the popularity of i386
there was not so much of consistent reporting?! I was very surprised,
when I read a few days ago that Linus seems to think that this one
here is only an individual problem...

Jarek P.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html