netdev - RE: RE: [bisected regression] e1000e: "Detected Hardware Unit Hang"

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]

Message-ID: <309B89C4C689E141A5FF6A0C5FB2118B78DDC307@ORSMSX101.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Sat, 30 May 2015 01:18:44 +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: RE: [bisected regression] e1000e: "Detected Hardware Unit Hang"

> From: Thomas Jarosch [mailto:thomas.jarosch@...ra2net.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 9:01 AM
> To: Brown, Aaron F
> Cc: Kirsher, Jeffrey T; 'Linux Netdev List'; Eric Dumazet; e1000-devel
> Subject: Re: RE: [bisected regression] e1000e: "Detected Hardware Unit
> Hang"
> 
> Hi Aaron,
> 
> On Monday, 23. March 2015 22:37:08 Brown, Aaron F wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 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.
> 
> any news on this from the Intel labs?

Nothing significant.  Another one of our testers (whom works more closely with the current e1000e driver owner than I) has managed to replicate it on several systems and I know the developer spent some time poking around the setup, but I don't think he's found the root cause yet and has been busy chasing a number of other issues.

> 
> Another two months passed ;) It would be nice to get rid
> of the workaround that limits the max fragment size to 4096.
> 
> Thanks,
> Thomas

--
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