netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] sh_eth: use RNC mode for R8A7790/R87791

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20140602.115303.1283021229124256917.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 02 Jun 2014 11:53:03 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk
Cc:	linux-kernel@...ethink.co.uk, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	nobuhiro.iwamatsu.yj@...esas.com, magnus.damn@...nsource.se,
	horms@...ge.net.au, yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com,
	cm-hiep@...so.co.jp
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sh_eth: use RNC mode for R8A7790/R87791

From: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>
Date: Mon,  2 Jun 2014 18:17:36 +0100

> The current behaviour of the sh_eth driver is not to use the RNC bit
> for the receive ring. This means that every packet recieved is not only
> generating an IRQ but it also stops the receive ring DMA as well until
> the driver re-enables it after unloading the packet.
> 
> This means that a number of the following errors are generated due to
> the receive packet FIFO overflowing due to nowhere to put packets:
> 
> 	net eth0: Receive FIFO Overflow
> 
> I have tested the RMCR_RNC configuration with NFS root filesystem and
> the driver has not failed yet.  There are further test reports from
> Sergei Shtylov and others for both the R8A7790 and R8A7791.
> 
> There is also feedback fron Cao Minh Hiep[1] which reports the
> same issue in (http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/316285)
> showing this fixes issues with losing UDP datagrams under iperf.
> 
> Tested-by: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>

Given the description, I can't fathom a reason why this wouldn't be
set always, for every chip.

Do some chips not implement this bit at all?
--
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