[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <309B89C4C689E141A5FF6A0C5FB2118B78D8BD39@ORSMSX101.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 22:37:08 +0000
From: "Brown, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>
To: Thomas Jarosch <thomas.jarosch@...ra2net.com>
CC: "Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
'Linux Netdev List' <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
e1000-devel <e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: RE: [bisected regression] e1000e: "Detected Hardware Unit Hang"
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Jarosch [mailto:thomas.jarosch@...ra2net.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 6:58 AM
> To: Brown, Aaron F
> Cc: Kirsher, Jeffrey T; 'Linux Netdev List'; Eric Dumazet; e1000-devel
> Subject: Re: [bisected regression] e1000e: "Detected Hardware Unit Hang"
>
> Hi Aaron,
>
> On Saturday, 21. February 2015 01:59:35 Brown, Aaron F wrote:
> > Thanks, that (and the multiple bug write-ups on sourceforge) gave me
> more
> > than enough to go on. I was able to replicate it on a handful of
> systems
> > in my lab. On effected systems setting up a NAT and stressing the
> > interfaces with even moderate traffic levels triggers it pretty quickly.
> > It appears that the NAT part is unnecessary, just setting the systems up
> > as a software router and running some traffic across it also triggers it
> > giving the same apparent behavior (tx hang, watchdog timeout trace, port
> > reset.)
> >
> > And with an internal reproduction of the issue I have created an
> internal
> > bug report, described my set of reproductions, referenced the similar
> > external ones and assigned it to our current e1000e developer.
>
> just wanted to quickly check if there has been any progress
> since the internal bug report has been filed?
No, no updates beyond a bit of investigation.
>
> Cheers,
> Thomas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists