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  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]
Date:   Fri, 25 Sep 2020 11:57:34 +0800
From:   Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "moderated list:INTEL ETHERNET DRIVERS" 
        <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
        "open list:NETWORKING DRIVERS" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] e1000e: Increase iteration on polling MDIC ready bit



> On Sep 25, 2020, at 03:57, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:45:42AM +0800, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
>> We are seeing the following error after S3 resume:
>> [  704.746874] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eno1: Setting page 0x6020
>> [  704.844232] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eno1: MDI Write did not complete
>> [  704.902817] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eno1: Setting page 0x6020
>> [  704.903075] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eno1: reading PHY page 769 (or 0x6020 shifted) reg 0x17
>> [  704.903281] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eno1: Setting page 0x6020
>> [  704.903486] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eno1: writing PHY page 769 (or 0x6020 shifted) reg 0x17
>> [  704.943155] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eno1: MDI Error
>> ...
>> [  705.108161] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eno1: Hardware Error
>> 
>> As Andrew Lunn pointed out, MDIO has nothing to do with phy, and indeed
>> increase polling iteration can resolve the issue.
>> 
>> The root cause is quite likely Intel ME, since it's a blackbox to the
>> kernel so the only approach we can take is to be patient and wait
>> longer.
> 
> Please could you explain how you see Intel ME being responsible for
> this. I'm not convinced.

Some other occurrences:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=d17c7868b2f8e329dcee4ecd2f5d16cfc9b26ac8
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20200323191639.48826-1-aaron.ma@canonical.com/

Of course we need an ACK from Intel this one is also related to ME.

Kai-Heng

> 
>      Andrew

Powered by blists - more mailing lists