From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
To: Andre Brait <andrebrait@gmail.com>
Cc: intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com, przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com,
g.goller@proxmox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-net v2] e1000e: work around TSO erratum that corrupts data and hangs Tx
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2026 09:57:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261021095756.0f5770e6@pumpkin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261020230211.75665-1-andrebrait@gmail.com>
On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 01:02:11 +0200
Andre Brait <andrebrait@gmail.com> wrote:
> On I219, a TSO packet whose first buffer is long and has a 4 KB
> boundary just after the TCP checksum field makes the NIC send corrupted
> data and then hang the Tx DMA. Forwarded VM traffic (tun/vhost-net)
> produces such packets, so hosts bridging guests onto an I219 hit it
> within minutes:
>
> e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eno1: Detected Hardware Unit Hang
>
> Right before the hang the receiver gets TCP segments carrying data from
> 128 bytes earlier in the stream, with a valid checksum.
>
> This is the erratum Intel documents for the 82571/82572 (#76), 82574
> (#17) and 82583V (#7): if the first buffer is larger than
> 3 * (max_read_request - 4) bytes and a 4 KB boundary falls just after
> the headers, a read is repeated, wrong data goes out with a correct
> checksum, and the Tx DMA hangs. e1000e never implemented the documented
> workaround.
>
> Apply it to all e1000e parts: limit the first data descriptor of a TSO
> packet to 3 * (max_read_request - 4) bytes (372 on the I219, where
> pcie_get_readrq() returns 128). The rest of the linear part goes into
> the next descriptor, which e1000_xmit_frame() already reserves;
Aren't you using an additional descriptor over and above those the code
might already use?
So either it was reserving one too many, or you need to reserve another one.
I'm not actually sure all the logic there is actually needed.
The code calculates the number of descriptors the packet is expected to need
and gets the packet requeued if there aren't enough, but there is also the
'post transmit' check that stops the transmit if there isn't enough room
for a full length packet.
If the latter is valid you don't need the former.
Although a sanity check that the ring isn't being wrapped might not do any
harm.
David
> the NIC
> still segments the packet.
...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-21 8:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-20 23:02 [PATCH iwl-net v2] e1000e: work around TSO erratum that corrupts data and hangs Tx Andre Brait
2026-10-21 8:57 ` David Laight [this message]
2026-10-21 10:49 ` André Brait
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=20261021095756.0f5770e6@pumpkin \
--to=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=andrebrait@gmail.com \
--cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com \
--cc=g.goller@proxmox.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@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