netdev - Re: [ISSUE][4.20.6] mlx5 and checksum failures

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: <CAA85sZtvnyJsa+jYFQsW+AhNfiZCk09YU7VcSRjztbe5ogtpkA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 Feb 2019 13:04:37 +0100
From:   Ian Kumlien <ian.kumlien@...il.com>
To:     Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@....mellanox.co.il>
Cc:     Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [ISSUE][4.20.6] mlx5 and checksum failures

One last update on this, 4.20.8 compiled with the same compiler works
- I still suspect that it was fixed by:
net/mlx5e: Force CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY for short ethernet frames

Anyway, we can forget about it now ;)

On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 4:54 PM Ian Kumlien <ian.kumlien@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 5:29 PM Ian Kumlien <ian.kumlien@...il.com> wrote
> > On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 11:01 PM Ian Kumlien <ian.kumlien@...il.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 7:43 PM Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@....mellanox.co.il> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 2:17 AM Ian Kumlien <ian.kumlien@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 2:01 AM Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@....mellanox.co.il> wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 3:00 PM Ian Kumlien <ian.kumlien@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > It changes directly after the first hw checksum failure, I don't know why =/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > weird, Maybe a real check-summing issue/corruption on the PCI ?!
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually, it seems to have been introduced in 4.20.6 - 4.20.5 works just fine
> >
> > > > Great, the difference is only 120 patches.
> > > > that is bisect-able, it will only take 5 iterations to find the
> > > > offending commit.
> > >
> > > I just wish it wasn't a server that takes, what feels like 5 minutes to boot...
> > >
> > > All of these seas of sensors 2d and 3d... =P
> > >
> > > But, yep, that's the plan
> >
> > Huh, spent most of the day with two bisects and none of them yielded
> > any results....
> >
> > Looks like I'll have to start investigating the elrepo kernel-ml build =(
>
> Just realized that it's not an entirely fair comparison - since
> retpolines wasn't enabled, damned old compilers...