netdev - Re: r8169 take too long to complete driver initialization

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: <CAB4CAwf8zFc8DtzjceATaZbrHJakioPHp7MPb+h7Sa1ySB-_RQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 5 Jan 2018 10:17:35 +0800
From:   Chris Chiu <chiu@...lessm.com>
To:     nic_swsd@...ltek.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Upstreaming Team <linux@...lessm.com>
Subject: Re: r8169 take too long to complete driver initialization

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Chris Chiu <chiu@...lessm.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>     We've hit a suspend/resume issue on a Acer desktop caused by r8169
> driver. The dmseg
> https://gist.github.com/mschiu77/b741849b5070281daaead8dfee312d1a
> shows it's still in msleep() within a mutex lock.
>     After looking into the code, it's caused by the
> rtl8168ep_stop_cmac() which is waiting 100 seconds for
> rtl_ocp_tx_cond. The following dmesg states that the r8169 driver is
> loaded.
>
> [   20.270526] r8169 Gigabit Ethernet driver 2.3LK-NAPI loaded
>
> But it takes > 100 seconds to get the following messages
>
> [  140.400223] r8169 0000:02:00.0 (unnamed net_device)
> (uninitialized): rtl_ocp_tx_cond == 1 (loop: 2000, delay: 50).
> [  140.413294] r8169 0000:02:00.0 eth0: RTL8168ep/8111ep at
> 0xffffb16c80db1000, f8:0f:41:ea:74:0d, XID 10200800 IRQ 46
> [  140.413297] r8169 0000:02:00.0 eth0: jumbo features [frames: 9200
> bytes, tx checksumming: ko]
>
> So any trial to suspend the machine during this period would always
> get device/resource busy message then abort. Is this  rtl_ocp_tx_cond
> necessary? Because the ethernet is still working and I don't see any
> problem. I don't know it should be considered normal or not. Please
> let me know if any more information required. Thanks
>
> Chris

gentle ping,

cheers.