From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@lists.linux.dev>
Cc: Ismael Luceno <ismael@iodev.co.uk>,
stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Hui Wang <hui.wang@canonical.com>,
Vitaly Lifshits <vitaly.lifshits@intel.com>
Subject: Re: Intel e1000e driver bug on stable (6.9.x)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 11:10:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2024061406-refreeze-flatfoot-f33a@gregkh> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6dcfa590-8d09-4d3a-9c35-0294099489ed@leemhuis.info>
On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 08:58:11AM +0200, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
> On 13.06.24 10:35, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 10:33:19PM +0200, Ismael Luceno wrote:
> >>
> >> I noticed that the NIC started to fail on a couple of notebooks [0]
> >> [1] after upgrading to 6.9.1.
> >>
> >> I tracked down the problem to commit 861e8086029e ("e1000e: move force
> >> SMBUS from enable ulp function to avoid PHY loss issue", 2024-03-03),
> >> included in all 6.9.x releases.
> >>
> >> The fix is in commit bfd546a552e1 ("e1000e: move force SMBUS near
> >> the end of enable_ulp function", 2024-05-28) from mainline.
> >>
> >> The NIC fails right after boot on both systems I tried; I mention
> >> because the description is a bit unclear about that on the fix, maybe
> >> other systems are affected differently.
> >
> > Now queued up, thanks.
>
> I see that they are in the latest 6.6.y and 6.9.y stable-rcs. Thing is:
>
> bfd546a552e1 causes other regressions, which is why Hui Wang submitted a
> revert for that one:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240611062416.16440-1-hui.wang@canonical.com/
>
> Vitaly Lifshits meanwhile submitted a change that afaics is meant to fix
> that regression:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240613120134.224585-1-vitaly.lifshits@intel.com/
>
> CCed both so they can comment.
>
> Not sure what's the best way forward here, maybe it is "not picking up
> bfd546a552e1 for now and waiting a few more days till the dust settles".
Ok, I'll just not pick this one up and let the maintainers figure it
out as this is still broken in Linus's tree as well.
Thanks for noticing this!
thanks,
greg k-h
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-14 9:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-12 20:33 Intel e1000e driver bug on stable (6.9.x) Ismael Luceno
2024-06-13 8:35 ` Greg KH
2024-06-14 6:58 ` Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)
2024-06-14 9:10 ` Greg KH [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2024061406-refreeze-flatfoot-f33a@gregkh \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hui.wang@canonical.com \
--cc=ismael@iodev.co.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=regressions@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vitaly.lifshits@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox