netdev - Re: E1000E/82567LM-3: link reported up too soon

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

Message-ID: <87iq1z8ikx.fsf@small.ssi.corp>
Date:	Tue, 21 Sep 2010 13:03:10 +0200
From:	arno@...isbad.org (Arnaud Ebalard)
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	brian.haley@...com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: E1000E/82567LM-3: link reported up too soon

Hi,

David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> writes:

> From: arno@...isbad.org (Arnaud Ebalard)
> Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 23:28:57 +0200
>
>> I added printk() to see where/if those first packets get dropped in
>> e1000e code. I followed those first packets to e1000_xmit_frame() and
>> don't see anything obvious happening there, i.e. they are passed to the
>> device as expected.
>
> I suspect the packet is sucessfully given to the chip and the PHY simply
> doesn't put it onto the wire for whatever reason.

I spent additional time on it, putting printk() at various locations in
e1000e driver code and also using driver's debug functions to see what
could be different in the internal state when the first packet is
delivered and when it is not. I just found nothing, so AFAICT your guess
above is backed up by those tests. 

I will try and summarize that for Intel ethernet drivers maintainers.

Cheers,

a+
--
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