[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20110128.115100.226772144.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 11:51:00 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com
Cc: amir.hanania@...el.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, gospo@...hat.com,
bphilips@...ell.com
Subject: Re: [net-2.6 v2 5/7] ixgbe: DDP last buffer size work around
From: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 04:29:01 -0800
> From: Amir Hanania <amir.hanania@...el.com>
>
> We found a hardware erratum on 82599 hardware that can lead to buffer
> overwriting if the last buffer in FCoE DDP is exactly PAGE_SIZE.
> If this is the case, we will make sure that there is no HW access to
> this buffer.
>
> Please see the 82599 Specification Update for more information.
>
> Signed-off-by: Amir Hanania <amir.hanania@...el.com>
> Tested-by: Ross Brattain <ross.b.brattain@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Jeff, I still think this change is bogus.
PAGE_SIZE is variable, so the chip can't possibly only BUG on that
specific value.
Maybe the condition is "any power-of-2 larger than or equal to 4096"?
Or something like that?
I pointed this out last night, and I was really hoping I'd get actual
feedback on this issue before you're respin your tree.
I'm not pulling in these changes until I get a human being telling me
what the situation is here with this bug.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists