netdev - Re: bnx2x machine check in bnx2x_ack

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:	Mon, 15 Dec 2008 11:04:00 -0700
From:	Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>
To:	"Eilon Greenstein" <eilong@...adcom.com>
Cc:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: bnx2x machine check in bnx2x_ack_int()

On Monday 15 December 2008 10:18:00 am Eilon Greenstein wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 08:21 -0800, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> 
> > > > I'm using bnx2x 1.45.23 from RHEL5.3s4 on a prototype ia64 platform,
> > > > and I see intermittent machine checks at bnx2x_ack_int+176, which is
> > > > just after __ia64_readl() returns.
> > > I see that you are using two 57710 chips. What kind of board are you
> > > using (which PHY)?
> > 
> > This is a blade with separate PHYs.  In this case, there is no PHY
> > at all because the module that would contain the PHY is not installed.
> > 
> > > > This is a proto with incomplete firmware, and the driver correctly
> > > > complains about that, but it seems like there's still a hole where
> > > > things blow up.
> > > If you set the right FW on the board, do you still see the problem? I'm
> > > asking to determine if this is a problem specific to the "no FW" case or
> > > general issue with this configuration
> > 
> > I'm trying to get FW installed, but haven't had any luck yet.
> 
> Hmmm... So it is possible that this is HW related (since we are talking
> about preliminary board with missing component and missing FW). I will
> ask for some field support - someone will contact you shortly.

Yep, it's definitely possible that this is HW related.  The proto
has 57710, but the product will ultimately use the 57711, so I don't
really even care about testing the 57710.

After upgrading some pieces on my boards, I can't reproduce the
MCA either.  So I guess we can just write it off for now.  The only
reason I pointed out the issue at all is because it really hampered
testing of standard distro bits on the rest of the box.

Sorry for the distraction.

Bjorn
--
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