From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756223AbZEUUA2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2009 16:00:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754168AbZEUUAQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2009 16:00:16 -0400 Received: from cpsmtpm-eml105.kpnxchange.com ([195.121.3.9]:51422 "EHLO CPSMTPM-EML105.kpnxchange.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753847AbZEUUAP (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2009 16:00:15 -0400 From: Frans Pop To: Netdev Subject: Re: [2.6.30] e1000e: pci_enable_pcie_error_reporting failed 0xfffffffb Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 22:00:13 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, Jesse Brandeburg , Jeff Kirsher References: <200905141312.35945.elendil@planet.nl> In-Reply-To: <200905141312.35945.elendil@planet.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200905212200.14375.elendil@planet.nl> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 May 2009 20:00:14.0751 (UTC) FILETIME=[C19F32F0:01C9DA4E] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 14 May 2009, Frans Pop wrote: > With 2.6.30-rc[45] I'm always seeing this error while resuming from STR > on my HP 2510p notebook: > > e1000e 0000:00:19.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 22 (level, low) -> IRQ 22 > ! e1000e 0000:00:19.0: pci_enable_pcie_error_reporting failed 0xfffffffb > e1000e 0000:00:19.0: setting latency timer to 64 > e1000e 0000:00:19.0: wake-up capability disabled by ACPI > e1000e 0000:00:19.0: PME# disabled > e1000e 0000:00:19.0: wake-up capability disabled by ACPI > e1000e 0000:00:19.0: PME# disabled > e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 26 for MSI/MSI-X > > The error only shows up during resume, not during normal boot. > > With 2.6.29 the error is not present. Is this something that should be > looked into? Networking still comes up normally. I'm still seeing this with 2.6.30-rc6. Should I just ignore it or is it an indication of a problem/regression? Cheers, FJP