netdev - Re: oops/warning report for the week of November 26, 2008

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]

Date:	Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:32:17 -0800
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Jay Cliburn <jcliburn@...il.com>
Cc:	NetDev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: oops/warning report for the week of November 26, 2008

On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 11:18:27 -0600
Jay Cliburn <jcliburn@...il.com> wrote:

> [trimmed the cc list down to netdev only]
> 
> > Rank 12: dev_watchdog(atl1) (oops)
> > 	Reported 56 times (109 total reports)
> > 	This oops was last seen in version 2.6.27.5, and first seen
> > in 2.6.26.6. More info:
> > http://www.kerneloops.org/searchweek.php?search=dev_watchdog(atl1)
> 
> The tx timeout reports at kerneloops.org appear to be happening on a
> startling variety of network drivers (startling to me, anyway): r8169,
> atl1, atl2, sis900, cdc_ether, orinoco_cs, tg3, ne2k-pci, via-rhine,
> 8139too, ath_pci, e1000, gl620a, sky2, hso, fealnx, forcedeth;
> probably others, but I quit looking.

to be specific in counts, the data I have so far is:

 count |           guilty           
-------+----------------------------
  1599 | dev_watchdog(sis900)
  1501 | dev_watchdog(r8169)
   280 | dev_watchdog(via-rhine)
   264 | dev_watchdog(cdc_ether)
   213 | dev_watchdog(usbnet)
   192 | dev_watchdog(8139too)
   164 | dev_watchdog(8390)
   158 | dev_watchdog(via_rhine)
   129 | dev_watchdog(ne2k-pci)
   122 | dev_watchdog(atl1)
   102 | dev_watchdog(atl2)
   101 | dev_watchdog(orinoco)

and then a long tail of sub-100, omitted to keep this mail not too
long; if anyone wants data on his/her driver not in the list, let me
know.

(please don't read too much in the word "guilty"; it's just the name of
the column in the kerneloops.org database used for identifing which
function was the prime suspect of a backtrace)

> 
> Is it correct to assume all these drivers are showing symptoms of the
> poor timeout handling you mentioned in your r8169 comment, or is the
> occasional tx timeout to be expected, and the leaders in this category
> (r8169, sis900, atl1) are the only ones suffering from deficient
> timeout handling?

For me, sis900 and r8169 stand out; if you look at the data in the
table above, both of these are an order of magnitude more frequent than
the rest of the pack. ATL1 isn't doing all that bad in this regard,
although your driver is still a little higher than other popular cards
like tg3, e1000, e1000e etc. (those are all sub-50). 


-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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