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]
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2023 20:04:08 +0700
From: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
To: Linux Regressions <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
	Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Intel Wired LAN <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
	Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
	Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>,
	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
	Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
	Anil Choudhary <anilchabba@...il.com>
Subject: Re: sr-iov related bonding regression (two regressions in one report)

On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 06:50:26AM +0100, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
> On 15.11.23 01:54, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
> > Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> I come across LACP bonding regression on Bugzilla [1].
> 
> Side note: Stephen forwards some (all?) network regressions to the right
> people:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231113083746.5e02f8b0@hermes.local/
> 
> Would be best to check for that, no need to forward things twice, that
> just results in a mess.
> 
> >> The reporter
> >> (Cc'ed) has two regressions. The first is actual LACP bonding
> >> regression (but terse):
> >>
> >>> Till linkx kernel 6.5.7 it is working fine, but after upgrading to 6.6.1 ping stop working with LACP bonding.
> >>> When we disable SR-IOV from bios , everything working fine
> 
> Makes me wonder if things have been working with or without the OOT
> module on 6.5.7, as strictly speaking it's only considered a kernel
> regression if thing worked with a vanilla kernel (e.g. without OOT
> modules) beforehand and broke when switching to a newer vanilla kernel.
> If that's the case it would be okay to add to regzbot.
> 
> >> And the second is out-of-tree module FTBFS:
> > [... skip OOT stuff ...]
> > 
> >> Should I add the first regression to regzbot (since the second one
> >> is obviously out-of-tree problem), or should I asked detailed regression
> >> info to the reporter?
> > 
> > 	My vote is to get additional information.  Given the nature of
> > the workaround ("When we disable SR-IOV from bios , everything working
> > fine"), it's plausible that the underlying cause is something
> > platform-specific.
> 
> Maybe, but when it comes to the "no regressions" rule that likely makes
> no difference from Linus perspective.
> 
> But I guess unless the intel folks or someone else has an idea what
> might be wrong here we likely need a bisection (with vanilla kernels of
> course) to get anywhere.
> 

OK, thanks!

-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists