From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1792769256; b=Tbt1jDoY7X6mQGbBMLDMj5VBfG+qZRE5agpSYqWkCKGZSIF4RtIvONrXggr8CYDxFvIW TpAPTDXfpR2GsE1ZDUpZubnDx0cEyyiVE6MKSVVWuNNANpm5IpO7cIXlLX024YOcIUOjn 1IYzEQfkoGZmZenluGJWjpiZC7qeUUol6yhku721zxdbsrFdMlC5Ahp9VKzHqta6ziVOR 12FS7Npn+EK/MLEYGXFrTJotfzy3l89yLYqPqleaLAjxkLJMzxdj1OXgAVf0YMtkc1xs8 BWIhxdOkZCF2mpYZp7DZL68G3+ROCss22shxx5h1RpxLRAKhz5Rc3zka939c7OECa0Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1792769256; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID: In-Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=NTuOzIACSQffEqMs+V167GzN1sC4z8a1DCfw0E3F1G4=; b=oE695LV2L09+E1fYjtK8lgCMPVFEIOw2gLnaQu9LMpKO0bqal8fbsaKtMih/ANhH++uD VC1V3IXt5mR1itOldpCSGhI2Zn0orpbFQGQ7uDIGOAaLlEsDn86O0lw1SCLvtXS7aEGtw oOtqyH+v+0Z9YQDpkobPt1pxjM1OX2Sg2qpDONqw63OnHD3+MLcmgBQ3Z5CX4RH4d374H 4EQvyq8A0iFUbI1kDBegb4P/7zjp4QkwLYB1aqfhl/gw4KCwaFV479u6GJv4jIbt4HjYX Nlk16k2GKKUNA4RI7kxS1Po65zoRsIUQsEtRuZRp+8Hk9LwM+HouQ/pvwmZVwurSkrg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=F10bZnce; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 447A3606A31A for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2026 15:27:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=F10bZnce Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A858F1F01825; Fri, 23 Oct 2026 15:27:35 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1792769255; bh=NTuOzIACSQffEqMs+V167GzN1sC4z8a1DCfw0E3F1G4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=F10bZncexROB0xaMiYkj8gJDhNwJg9sRmEMrjnUp+4Xyw48r1CUU6qxC2AcgeAcva LBUCyD2Jx+oP1lQ/BeOCjDxcxlDGp6Chtt/8+0xCZT0xJwL2MHRewz8oo0MVelvhv6 fNv6SrqAsvwnT2glcRb4GM1rEbWpeanP6CQGJC1wEkWJw7vKLnqxv6p2h/Kw7IEEEW Ppe5k/Bf+87Y2dPMwcOXfeNBj81vnUolUIqsYov0DBJvyDMdvwTB3D3T3qD6tpqsNB JTb0iMHCTZhfI2wrUu2OSisuD+8cCdiN2zumSfz/3ez63kh8XcEeHBYycUTuOeSZP6 RSv/qaevADnUA== Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2026 08:27:35 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Paolo Abeni Cc: Tariq Toukan , Leon Romanovsky , Saeed Mahameed , Mark Bloch , network dev , Matthieu Baerts Subject: Re: nipa H/W testing suddenly failing on CX7 Message-ID: <20261023082735.7103e573@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <06502f83-f22a-4522-9a30-60b2478a8c2c@redhat.com> References: <06502f83-f22a-4522-9a30-60b2478a8c2c@redhat.com> X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 16:01:48 +0200 Paolo Abeni wrote: > Hi, > > Mat noted that H/W self-tests suddenly started failing on the > mentioned NIC: > > https://netdev.bots.linux.dev/flakes.html?min-flip=0&br-cnt=20&br-pfx=net-next-hw&ld-remote=netdev-CX7 > > Judging from the test output, GRO stopped aggregating and the > driver exposes a single queue?!? > > I could not spot anything obviously wrong in the relevant > batch: > > https://netdev.bots.linux.dev/branch_deltas/net-next-hw-2026-10-22--00-00.html > > Could you please have a look? FWIW I think it's the garbage check added to page pool, which Paolo already identified. Please ignore. Side note, I don't think we should be expecting vendors to pay attention to netdev CI. We can set up a group of community developers who would be willing / able to jump on such issues if maintainers are overloaded. Vendor help is obviously welcome if voluntary but I feel like I implied/promised in the past that the CI will not be a burden to vendors, and this email goes against that.