netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v13 3/3] net: hisilicon: new hip04 ethernet driver

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, 19 Jan 2015 21:34:17 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>
Cc:	Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>, robh+dt@...nel.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, grant.likely@...aro.org,
	sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
	xuwei5@...ilicon.com, zhangfei.gao@...aro.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux@....linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v13 3/3] net: hisilicon: new hip04 ethernet driver

On Monday 19 January 2015 19:11:11 Alexander Graf wrote:
> 
> After hammering on the box a bit again, I'm in a situation where I get 
> lots of
> 
> [302398.232603] hip04-ether e28b0000.ethernet eth0: rx drop
> [302398.377309] hip04-ether e28b0000.ethernet eth0: rx drop
> [302398.395198] hip04-ether e28b0000.ethernet eth0: rx drop
> [302398.466118] hip04-ether e28b0000.ethernet eth0: rx drop
> [302398.659009] hip04-ether e28b0000.ethernet eth0: rx drop
> [302399.053389] hip04-ether e28b0000.ethernet eth0: rx drop
> [302399.122067] hip04-ether e28b0000.ethernet eth0: rx drop
> [302399.268192] hip04-ether e28b0000.ethernet eth0: rx drop
> [302399.286081] hip04-ether e28b0000.ethernet eth0: rx drop
> [302399.594201] hip04-ether e28b0000.ethernet eth0: rx drop
> [302399.683416] hip04-ether e28b0000.ethernet eth0: rx drop
> [302399.701307] hip04-ether e28b0000.ethernet eth0: rx drop
> 
> and I really am getting a lot of drops - I can't even ping the machine 
> anymore.
> 
> However, as it is there's a good chance the machine is simply 
> unreachable because it's busy writing to the UART, and even if not all 
> useful messages indicating anything have scrolled out. I really don't 
> think you should emit any message over and over again to the user. Once 
> or twice is enough.
>
> Please make sure to rate limit it.

I would argue that packet loss is not an error condition at all
and you should not print this at netdev_err() level. You could make
this a netdev_dbg(), or just make it silent because it's already
counted in the statistics.

	Arnd
--
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