netdev - Re: Tulip 21142 panic on physical link disconnect

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: <5a21c21844beadb68ead00cb401ca1c0@wizardsworks.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 15:56:16 -0700
From: Greg Chandler <chandleg@...ardsworks.org>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...am.me.uk>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Tulip 21142 panic on physical link disconnect

On 2025/06/19 14:53, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2025, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> 
>> >   Maybe it'll ring someone's bell and they'll chime in or otherwise I'll
>> > bisect it... sometime.  Or feel free to start yourself with 5.18, as it's
>> > not terribly old, only a bit and certainly not so as 2.6 is.
>> 
>> I am still not sure why I could not see that warning on by Cobalt 
>> Qube2 trying
>> to reproduce Greg's original issue, that is with an IP assigned on the
>> interface yanking the cable did not trigger a timer warning. It could 
>> be that
>> machine is orders of magnitude slower and has a different CONFIG_HZ 
>> value that
>> just made it less likely to be seen?
> 
>  Can it have a different PHY attached?  There's this code:
> 
> 	if (tp->chip_id == PNIC2)
> 		tp->link_change = pnic2_lnk_change;
> 	else if (tp->flags & HAS_NWAY)
> 		tp->link_change = t21142_lnk_change;
> 	else if (tp->flags & HAS_PNICNWAY)
> 		tp->link_change = pnic_lnk_change;
> 
> in `tulip_init_one' and `pnic_lnk_change' won't ever trigger this, but 
> the
> other two can; apparently the corresponding comment in 
> `tulip_interrupt':
> 
> /*
>  * NB: t21142_lnk_change() does a del_timer_sync(), so be careful if 
> this
>  * call is ever done under the spinlock
>  */
> 
> hasn't been updated when `pnic2_lnk_change' was added.  Also ISTM no 
> link
> change handler is a valid option too, in which case `del_timer_sync' 
> won't
> be called either.  This is from a cursory glance only, so please take 
> with
> a pinch of salt.
> 
>   Maciej




I'm not sure which of us that was directed at, but for my onboard 
tulips:

Micro Linear ML6698CH <- PHY
Intel 21143-TD <- NIC

I know that the ML chips are most commonly used with 21143s and a very 
small smattering of others, I don't think they are all that common at 
least not since the late '90s..
I'm relatively certain all my DEC ISA/PCI nics use them though.

I found a link to the datasheet (If needed), but have had mixed luck 
with alldatasheets:
https://www.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/pdf/75840/MICRO-LINEAR/ML6698CH.html

Glancing over it I don't see anything about the link, I'll go stick my 
eyes in the driver a bit and see what stabs me in the eye....