On Mon 2017-12-18 13:24:40, Neftin, Sasha wrote: > On 12/18/2017 12:26, Pavel Machek wrote: > >Hi! > > > >>>>>In v4.15-rc2+, network manager can not see my ethernet card, and > >>>>>manual attempts to ifconfig it up did not really help, either. > >>>>> > >>>>>Card is: > >>>>> > >>>>>02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82573L Gigabit Ethernet > >>>>>Controller > >>>.... > >>>>>Any ideas ? > >>>>Yes , 19110cfbb34d4af0cdfe14cd243f3b09dc95b013 broke it. > >>>> > >>>>See: > >>>>https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198047 > >>>> > >>>>Fix there : > >>>>https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=151272209903675&w=2 > >>>I don't see the patch in latest mainline. Not having ethernet > >>>is... somehow annoying. What is going on there? > >>Generally speaking, e1000 maintainence has been handled very poorly over > >>the past few years, I have to say. > >> > >>Fixes take forever to propagate even when someone other than the > >>maintainer provides a working and tested fix, just like this case. > >> > >>Jeff, please take e1000 maintainence seriously and get these critical > >>bug fixes propagated. > >No response AFAICT. I guess I should test reverting > >19110cfbb34d4af0cdfe14cd243f3b09dc95b013, then ask you for revert? > > Hello Pavel, > > Before ask for reverting 19110cfbb..., please, check if follow patch of > Benjamin work for you http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/846825/
Jacob said, in another email:
# Digging into this, the problem is complicated. The original bug
# assumed behavior of the .check_for_link call, which is universally not
# implemented.
#
# I think the correct fix is to revert 19110cfbb34d ("e1000e: Separate
# signaling for link check/link up", 2017-10-10) and find a more proper
solution.
...which makes me think that revert is preffered?
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures)
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
