On Wed 15 Feb at 23:29:17 +0000 [email protected] said: > > From: Tim Pepper [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > A very similar bug report is here: > > http://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2011/11/14/127 > > and notes two issues: > > 1) The napi_enable() and napi_disable() should only be called in the > > e1000_open and e1000_close functions respectively > > 2) There no synchronization preventing a call to the driver close while > > executing error processing.
... > > > > > We don't explicitly set CONFIG_E1000E_NAPI in our build, but it looks > > like src/kcompat.h probably automagically sets it since we haven't > > defined E1000E_NO_NAPI. So we likely hit issue #1. > > > > But what about #2? It seems like something would still be needed to > > address that and given a reading of the code paths involved with the > > above kernel warnings/bugs, that concurrency issue seem to be just what > > we're hitting. Does Intel have a fix in the works for that portion? > > Any patches we might be able to test? > > I'm not aware of anything in the works for this. Should I open a bug on sf.net to track this then? Tim -- Tim Pepper <[email protected]> IBM Linux Technology Center ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/ _______________________________________________ E1000-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
