netdev - Driver has suspect GRO implementation, TCP performance may be compromised.

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <e070e241-fb65-a5b0-3155-7380a9203bcf@molgen.mpg.de>
Date:   Tue, 28 May 2019 17:42:32 +0200
From:   Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
To:     Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Cc:     intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Driver has suspect GRO implementation, TCP performance may be
 compromised.

Dear Linux folks,


Occasionally, Linux outputs the message below on the workstation Dell
OptiPlex 5040 MT.

    TCP: net00: Driver has suspect GRO implementation, TCP performance may be compromised.

Linux 4.14.55 and Linux 5.2-rc2 show the message, and the WWW also
gives some hits [1][2].

```
$ sudo ethtool -i net00
driver: e1000e
version: 3.2.6-k
firmware-version: 0.8-4
expansion-rom-version: 
bus-info: 0000:00:1f.6
supports-statistics: yes
supports-test: yes
supports-eeprom-access: yes
supports-register-dump: yes
supports-priv-flags: no
```

Can the driver e1000e be improved?

Any idea, what triggers this, as I do not see it every boot? Download
of big files?


Kind regards,

Paul


[1]: https://access.redhat.com/solutions/3152971
     "Why following error "TCP: ensX: Driver has suspect GRO implementation, TCP performance may be compromised" are seen in system log file ?"
[2]: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/723007/


Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (5174 bytes)