All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* uli526x hangs on 2.6.29, not on rc8
@ 2009-03-26 23:15 Santiago Garcia Mantinan
  2009-03-26 23:35 ` Eric Dumazet
  2009-03-27  0:01 ` Frans Pop
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Santiago Garcia Mantinan @ 2009-03-26 23:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Hi!

After upgrading from rc8 to final 2.6.29 my machine's network stops working
after some full speed (100Mb/s) downloads ifdown;ifup, or powering off the
switch won't solve the problem, however it is solved if I unload the driver
module and load it again. Tested with another NIC (e1000e based) and
couldn't reproduce the problem.

This is happening on final 2.6.29 version but doesn't seem to happen on rc8
with the same kernel config. Machine is a AMD Athlon 64 running Debian 64
bits.

I don't see any changes on the git for uli526x from rc8 to final, but the
tulip driver on which this one is based had some changes.

Don't know what else to add, just ask me for whatever data that may help on
this.

Regards...
-- 
Manty/BestiaTester -> http://manty.net

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: uli526x hangs on 2.6.29, not on rc8
  2009-03-26 23:15 uli526x hangs on 2.6.29, not on rc8 Santiago Garcia Mantinan
@ 2009-03-26 23:35 ` Eric Dumazet
  2009-03-27  0:01 ` Frans Pop
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Eric Dumazet @ 2009-03-26 23:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Santiago Garcia Mantinan; +Cc: linux-kernel

Santiago Garcia Mantinan a écrit :
> Hi!
> 
> After upgrading from rc8 to final 2.6.29 my machine's network stops working
> after some full speed (100Mb/s) downloads ifdown;ifup, or powering off the
> switch won't solve the problem, however it is solved if I unload the driver
> module and load it again. Tested with another NIC (e1000e based) and
> couldn't reproduce the problem.
> 
> This is happening on final 2.6.29 version but doesn't seem to happen on rc8
> with the same kernel config. Machine is a AMD Athlon 64 running Debian 64
> bits.
> 
> I don't see any changes on the git for uli526x from rc8 to final, but the
> tulip driver on which this one is based had some changes.
> 
> Don't know what else to add, just ask me for whatever data that may help on
> this.
> 
> Regards...

Hi

This is a known problem, and a fix should be available very soon for 2.6.29.1

http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg92829.html

You can check net/core/dev.c function process_backlog() should get this
updated version :

static int process_backlog(struct napi_struct *napi, int quota)
{
	int work = 0;
	struct softnet_data *queue = &__get_cpu_var(softnet_data);
	unsigned long start_time = jiffies;

	napi->weight = weight_p;
	do {
		struct sk_buff *skb;

		local_irq_disable();
		skb = __skb_dequeue(&queue->input_pkt_queue);
		if (!skb) {
			list_del(&napi->poll_list);
			clear_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED, &napi->state);
			local_irq_enable();
			break;
		}
		local_irq_enable();

		napi_gro_receive(napi, skb);
	} while (++work < quota && jiffies == start_time);

	napi_gro_flush(napi);

	return work;
}



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: uli526x hangs on 2.6.29, not on rc8
  2009-03-26 23:15 uli526x hangs on 2.6.29, not on rc8 Santiago Garcia Mantinan
  2009-03-26 23:35 ` Eric Dumazet
@ 2009-03-27  0:01 ` Frans Pop
  2009-03-27 18:04   ` Santiago Garcia Mantinan
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Frans Pop @ 2009-03-27  0:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Santiago Garcia Mantinan; +Cc: linux-kernel

Hi Manty,

Santiago Garcia Mantinan wrote:
> After upgrading from rc8 to final 2.6.29 my machine's network stops
> working after some full speed (100Mb/s) downloads ifdown;ifup, or
> powering off the switch won't solve the problem, however it is solved if
> I unload the driver module and load it again. Tested with another NIC
> (e1000e based) and couldn't reproduce the problem.

Known issue probably. Try: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/25/217

Cheers,
FJP

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: uli526x hangs on 2.6.29, not on rc8
  2009-03-27  0:01 ` Frans Pop
@ 2009-03-27 18:04   ` Santiago Garcia Mantinan
  2009-03-27 20:13     ` Frans Pop
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Santiago Garcia Mantinan @ 2009-03-27 18:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Frans Pop; +Cc: Santiago Garcia Mantinan, linux-kernel

> Known issue probably. Try: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/25/217

Yes, seems related, I'm testing that patch right now on my machine, but I'm
wondering if I should test that one or this one
(http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg92829.html) sent also by Herbert to
the netdev list but at a later time.  I'll try test the second one also just
in case.

Regards...
-- 
Manty/BestiaTester -> http://manty.net

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: uli526x hangs on 2.6.29, not on rc8
  2009-03-27 18:04   ` Santiago Garcia Mantinan
@ 2009-03-27 20:13     ` Frans Pop
  2009-03-28  0:08       ` Santiago Garcia Mantinan
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Frans Pop @ 2009-03-27 20:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Santiago Garcia Mantinan; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Friday 27 March 2009, Santiago Garcia Mantinan wrote:
> > Known issue probably. Try: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/25/217
>
> Yes, seems related, I'm testing that patch right now on my machine, but
> I'm wondering if I should test that one or this one
> (http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg92829.html) sent also by
> Herbert to the netdev list but at a later time.  I'll try test the
> second one also just in case.

No, the plain revert is safer.

If you want to test another patch, you should probably try this one 
instead, which AFAIK is the best real fix available:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/26/79

Cheers,
FJP

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: uli526x hangs on 2.6.29, not on rc8
  2009-03-27 20:13     ` Frans Pop
@ 2009-03-28  0:08       ` Santiago Garcia Mantinan
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Santiago Garcia Mantinan @ 2009-03-28  0:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Frans Pop; +Cc: linux-kernel

> > > Known issue probably. Try: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/25/217
> > Yes, seems related, I'm testing that patch right now on my machine, but
> > I'm wondering if I should test that one or this one
> > (http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg92829.html) sent also by
> > Herbert to the netdev list but at a later time.  I'll try test the
> > second one also just in case.
> No, the plain revert is safer.

Ok, I have tested both during quite a long time (hours compared to the few
minutes it took the system to hang before) and both patches seem to work ok,
I'll stick with the first one following your recommendations.

Thanks!
-- 
Manty/BestiaTester -> http://manty.net

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2009-03-28  0:08 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-03-26 23:15 uli526x hangs on 2.6.29, not on rc8 Santiago Garcia Mantinan
2009-03-26 23:35 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-27  0:01 ` Frans Pop
2009-03-27 18:04   ` Santiago Garcia Mantinan
2009-03-27 20:13     ` Frans Pop
2009-03-28  0:08       ` Santiago Garcia Mantinan

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.