On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 11:41 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Arthur Jones
> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 12:59:05 -0700
>
>> As with igb, when the e1000e driver is fed 802.1q
>> packets with hardware checksum on, it chokes with an
>> error of the form:
>>
>> checksum_partial proto=81!
>>
>> As the log
From: Arthur Jones
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 12:59:05 -0700
> As with igb, when the e1000e driver is fed 802.1q
> packets with hardware checksum on, it chokes with an
> error of the form:
>
> checksum_partial proto=81!
>
> As the logic there was not smart enough to look into
> the vlan header to p
From: Arthur Jones
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:39:24 -0700
> When the 82575 is fed 802.1q packets, it chokes with
> an error of the form:
>
> igb :08:00.1: partial checksum but proto=81
>
> As the logic there was not smart enough to look into
> the vlan header to pick out the encapsulated pro
Hi. This is the MAILNARA program at "mail.asiaeconomy.co.kr".
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
:
Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1)
See the copy of the mail header and refer
From: "Brandeburg, Jesse"
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 10:24:18 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
> Interesting, this code has been there for eons (and probably this
> behavior) but that doesn't mean its not a problem.
>
> We are in the process of figuring out if there are any hardware corner
> cases to
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Brandeburg, Jesse
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, Dave Boutcher wrote:
> > Eric, based on your inability to recreate this, I tried on some other
> > hardware I had lying around that has an AMD chipset built-in NIC.
> > I could not recreate the problem on that hard
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Brandeburg, Jesse <
jesse.brandeb...@intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, Dave Boutcher wrote:
>> Eric, based on your inability to recreate this, I tried on some other
>> hardware I had lying around that has an AMD chipset built-in NIC.
>> I could not recreate
Hi. This is the MAILNARA program at "mail.asiaeconomy.co.kr".
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
:
Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1)
See the copy of the mail header and refer
* Brandeburg, Jesse wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > >> http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/2/318
> > >
> > > We are still looking for more testing from the general community of
> > > this patch, in particular if any tx hangs are reported. Thanks in
> > > advance for any report
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >> http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/2/318
> >
> > We are still looking for more testing from the general community of
> > this patch, in particular if any tx hangs are reported. Thanks in
> > advance for any reports.--
>
> Yeah - already picked it up into
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, Dave Boutcher wrote:
> Eric, based on your inability to recreate this, I tried on some other
> hardware I had lying around that has an AMD chipset built-in NIC.
> I could not recreate the problem on that hardware. I'm starting to
> think this is an e1000 problem. In both the
* Brandeburg, Jesse wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Lubomir Rintel wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, March 18, 2009 8:04 am, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >>>
> >>> ( e1000e Cc:s added. A new debug feature, CONFIG_DMA_API_DEBUG=y,
> >>> has triggered the warning below in e1000_put_txbuf(). )
> >>
> >> http
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Lubomir Rintel wrote:
>
>> On Wed, March 18, 2009 8:04 am, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>
>>> ( e1000e Cc:s added. A new debug feature, CONFIG_DMA_API_DEBUG=y,
>>> has triggered the warning below in e1000_put_txbuf(). )
>>
>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/2/318
We are still look
There's a similar-looking warning triggering for the forcedeth
driver as well on another test-system (see the details below).
Does anyone know whether there's a fix for this too, or is it a
new warning?
Ingo
- Forwarded message from Ingo Molnar -
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:20:
* Lubomir Rintel wrote:
> On Wed, March 18, 2009 8:04 am, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > ( e1000e Cc:s added. A new debug feature, CONFIG_DMA_API_DEBUG=y,
> > has triggered the warning below in e1000_put_txbuf(). )
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/2/318
Thanks.
Ingo
On Wed, March 18, 2009 8:04 am, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> ( e1000e Cc:s added. A new debug feature, CONFIG_DMA_API_DEBUG=y,
> has triggered the warning below in e1000_put_txbuf(). )
http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/3/2/318
--
Lubomir Rintel
-
( e1000e Cc:s added. A new debug feature, CONFIG_DMA_API_DEBUG=y,
has triggered the warning below in e1000_put_txbuf(). )
* Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 10:38:47AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > e1000e :00:19.0: irq 30 for MSI/MSI-X
> > e1000e :00:19.0: irq 30 for MSI
Hi
Sounds like spanning tree. Check your switch and set the port to
> portfast (begin forwarding packets immediately, even while performing
> spanning tree).
I've been talking to the network admins and spanning tree is disabled for
the port these servers are plugged into. It must be something e
18 matches
Mail list logo
