On 29/04/2012 17:45, Nix wrote:
> On 24 Apr 2012, Jesse Brandeburg outgrape:
>
>> Please let us know the results of your testing, we will let you know if
>> we see any issues as well.
Right, I have finally managed to test my patch on my servers. I've had a
really tough week with them due to my cl
On 24 Apr 2012, Jesse Brandeburg outgrape:
> Please let us know the results of your testing, we will let you know if
> we see any issues as well.
Alas, it has no effect at all here; L0s and L1 claim to be being
disabled at boot time, but if you ask with lspci you see that they are
not. I strongly
On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 22:29:36 +0100
Chris Boot wrote:
> Please note I haven't as-yet tested this code at all, but I do know that
> disabling ASPM L1 on these NICs (using setpci) fixes the hangs that I
> have been seeing on my Supermicro servers with X9SCL-F boards. I hope to
> get the chance to ins
After much toing and froing on LKML, netdev and the e1000 mailing lists
over the past few months we've determined that the 82574L needs to have
both ASPM L0s and L1 disabled or else it's likely to lock up. This
little series does just that, also cleaning up some now-unnecessary code
that disables L
