From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Kok, Auke" Subject: Re: e1000: assertion hit in e1000_clean(), kernel 2.6.21.1 Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 12:03:08 -0700 Message-ID: <46509B6C.2070604@intel.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cebbert@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jesse Brandeburg To: Herbert Xu Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:60407 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755451AbXETTDe (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 May 2007 15:03:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Herbert Xu wrote: > Kok, Auke wrote: >>> The source file has four extra lines at the top because of a >>> trivial wireless patch, so 898 in that code is really 894 in >>> the stock kernel. >> please shared that code then. > > I've had a look and e1000 is definitely buggy. > > The problem is that you're calling netif_poll_enable on startup. > This is *wrong*. > > netif_poll_enable can only be called if you've previously called > netif_poll_disable. Otherwise a poll might already be in action > and you may get a crash like this. > > So perhaps you should divide e1000_up into two sections, one that > is called on both start and restart and another which is only > called on restart (i.e., after e1000_down). OK, that would explain the recent frenzy of reports in this matter. That code was only recently merged. I will dig into this and get a patch out as soon as I can so you can test this. Thanks Herbert. Auke