Hi Thomas,
At 06/04/2018 07:17 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jun 2018, Dou Liyang wrote:
Here, why didn't we avoid this cleanup by
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
index a75de0792942..0cc59646755f 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
+++
Hi Thomas,
At 06/04/2018 07:17 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jun 2018, Dou Liyang wrote:
Here, why didn't we avoid this cleanup by
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
index a75de0792942..0cc59646755f 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
+++
On Mon, 4 Jun 2018, Dou Liyang wrote:
> Here, why didn't we avoid this cleanup by
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
> index a75de0792942..0cc59646755f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
> @@ -821,6 +821,9
On Mon, 4 Jun 2018, Dou Liyang wrote:
> Here, why didn't we avoid this cleanup by
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
> index a75de0792942..0cc59646755f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
> @@ -821,6 +821,9
Hi Thomas,
Sorry to ask the questions at this series, my mailbox was kicked out of
the mailing list a few days ago, and didn't receive the e-mail.
please see below
At 05/29/2018 04:09 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 28 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
This doesn't fix the issue with bnxt. Here
Hi Thomas,
Sorry to ask the questions at this series, my mailbox was kicked out of
the mailing list a few days ago, and didn't receive the e-mail.
please see below
At 05/29/2018 04:09 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 28 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
This doesn't fix the issue with bnxt. Here
Song,
On Tue, 29 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
> > On May 29, 2018, at 1:35 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> Maybe we cannot enable all trace points under irq_vectors/ and irq_matrix.
> >
> > Right. Sorry, I forgot to say that we only need the irq_vectors ones which
> > are related to vector
Song,
On Tue, 29 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
> > On May 29, 2018, at 1:35 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> Maybe we cannot enable all trace points under irq_vectors/ and irq_matrix.
> >
> > Right. Sorry, I forgot to say that we only need the irq_vectors ones which
> > are related to vector
> On May 29, 2018, at 1:35 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> On Mon, 28 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
>>> On May 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, 28 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
This doesn't fix the issue with bnxt. Here is a trace with this patch:
>>>
>>> That's
> On May 29, 2018, at 1:35 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> On Mon, 28 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
>>> On May 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, 28 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
This doesn't fix the issue with bnxt. Here is a trace with this patch:
>>>
>>> That's
On Mon, 28 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
> > On May 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 28 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
> >> This doesn't fix the issue with bnxt. Here is a trace with this patch:
> >
> > That's just the backtrace which is not really helpful. The real question is
On Mon, 28 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
> > On May 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 28 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
> >> This doesn't fix the issue with bnxt. Here is a trace with this patch:
> >
> > That's just the backtrace which is not really helpful. The real question is
On Mon, 28 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
> This doesn't fix the issue with bnxt. Here is a trace with this patch:
That's just the backtrace which is not really helpful. The real question is
what leads to this scenaria.
What I was asking for is to enable the irq_vector and irq_matrix trace
points
On Mon, 28 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
> This doesn't fix the issue with bnxt. Here is a trace with this patch:
That's just the backtrace which is not really helpful. The real question is
what leads to this scenaria.
What I was asking for is to enable the irq_vector and irq_matrix trace
points
> On May 28, 2018, at 3:53 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> On Fri, 25 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
>> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:49 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 May 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
I have your patch merged into my internal branch, it prints the following:
[
> On May 28, 2018, at 3:53 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> On Fri, 25 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
>> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:49 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 May 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
I have your patch merged into my internal branch, it prints the following:
[
> On May 28, 2018, at 7:27 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> On Mon, 28 May 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
>> On 28/05/2018 1:53 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Fri, 25 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:49 AM, Thomas Gleixner
wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2018, Tariq
> On May 28, 2018, at 7:27 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> On Mon, 28 May 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
>> On 28/05/2018 1:53 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Fri, 25 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:49 AM, Thomas Gleixner
wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2018, Tariq
On Mon, 28 May 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> On 28/05/2018 1:53 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:49 AM, Thomas Gleixner
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 23 May 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> > > > > I have your patch
On Mon, 28 May 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> On 28/05/2018 1:53 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:49 AM, Thomas Gleixner
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 23 May 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> > > > > I have your patch merged into my
On Fri, 25 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:49 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 May 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> >> I have your patch merged into my internal branch, it prints the following:
> >>
> >> [ 4898.226258] Trying to clear prev_vector: 0
>
On Fri, 25 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:49 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 May 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> >> I have your patch merged into my internal branch, it prints the following:
> >>
> >> [ 4898.226258] Trying to clear prev_vector: 0
> >> [ 4898.226439]
On 28/05/2018 1:53 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:49 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
I have your patch merged into my internal branch, it prints the following:
[ 4898.226258]
On 28/05/2018 1:53 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2018, Song Liu wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:49 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
I have your patch merged into my internal branch, it prints the following:
[ 4898.226258] Trying to clear
Adding Broadcom developers to the thread.
Hi Michael, Vasundhara, and Andy,
Could you please help look into the case I found? ethtool crashes the system
for both net/master and net-next/master.
Thanks,
Song
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 1:10 PM, Song Liu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We
Adding Broadcom developers to the thread.
Hi Michael, Vasundhara, and Andy,
Could you please help look into the case I found? ethtool crashes the system
for both net/master and net-next/master.
Thanks,
Song
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 1:10 PM, Song Liu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are seeing something
Hi,
We are seeing something probably related.
We run ethtool on a system with Broadcom NIC to increase number of
combined queues.
[root@ ~]# ethtool -l eth0
Channel parameters for eth0:
Pre-set maximums:
RX: 9
TX: 8
Other: 0
Hi,
We are seeing something probably related.
We run ethtool on a system with Broadcom NIC to increase number of
combined queues.
[root@ ~]# ethtool -l eth0
Channel parameters for eth0:
Pre-set maximums:
RX: 9
TX: 8
Other: 0
On Wed, 23 May 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> On 19/05/2018 2:20 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 May 2018, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
> > > I'm not entirely sure that it's the same fault, but at least backtrace
> > > looks resembling.
> >
> > Yes, it's similar, but not the same issue. I'll
On Wed, 23 May 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> On 19/05/2018 2:20 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 May 2018, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
> > > I'm not entirely sure that it's the same fault, but at least backtrace
> > > looks resembling.
> >
> > Yes, it's similar, but not the same issue. I'll
On 19/05/2018 2:20 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 18 May 2018, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
I'm not entirely sure that it's the same fault, but at least backtrace
looks resembling.
Yes, it's similar, but not the same issue. I'll stare are the code ...
Thanks,
tglx
We still see the
On 19/05/2018 2:20 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 18 May 2018, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
I'm not entirely sure that it's the same fault, but at least backtrace
looks resembling.
Yes, it's similar, but not the same issue. I'll stare are the code ...
Thanks,
tglx
We still see the
On Fri, 18 May 2018, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
> I'm not entirely sure that it's the same fault, but at least backtrace
> looks resembling.
Yes, it's similar, but not the same issue. I'll stare are the code ...
Thanks,
tglx
On Fri, 18 May 2018, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
> I'm not entirely sure that it's the same fault, but at least backtrace
> looks resembling.
Yes, it's similar, but not the same issue. I'll stare are the code ...
Thanks,
tglx
2018-05-18 23:41 GMT+01:00 Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454...@gmail.com>:
> What I did - was running x86 selftests and ssh'ing at the same moment.
> Will try it again if it'll fire by any chance.
No, I've tried a couple of times (after reboot as it's ONCE), but it looks
hard to reproduce by hands without
2018-05-18 23:41 GMT+01:00 Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454...@gmail.com>:
> What I did - was running x86 selftests and ssh'ing at the same moment.
> Will try it again if it'll fire by any chance.
No, I've tried a couple of times (after reboot as it's ONCE), but it looks
hard to reproduce by hands without
Hi Thomas, Tariq,
2018-02-20 18:11 GMT+00:00 Thomas Gleixner :
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
>
>> Hi Thomas,
>>
>> We started seeing new issues in our net-device daily regression tests.
>> They are related to patch [1] introduced in kernel 4.15-rc1.
>>
>> We
Hi Thomas, Tariq,
2018-02-20 18:11 GMT+00:00 Thomas Gleixner :
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
>
>> Hi Thomas,
>>
>> We started seeing new issues in our net-device daily regression tests.
>> They are related to patch [1] introduced in kernel 4.15-rc1.
>>
>> We frequently see a warning
On 22/02/2018 11:38 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 21 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
On 20/02/2018 8:18 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
Is there CPU hotplugging in play?
No.
Ok.
I'll come back to you
On 22/02/2018 11:38 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 21 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
On 20/02/2018 8:18 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
Is there CPU hotplugging in play?
No.
Ok.
I'll come back to you
On Wed, 21 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> On 20/02/2018 8:18 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> > >
> > > Is there CPU hotplugging in play?
>
> No.
Ok.
> > >
> > > I'll come back to you tomorrow with a
On Wed, 21 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> On 20/02/2018 8:18 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> > >
> > > Is there CPU hotplugging in play?
>
> No.
Ok.
> > >
> > > I'll come back to you tomorrow with a
On 20/02/2018 8:18 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
Is there CPU hotplugging in play?
No.
I'll come back to you tomorrow with a plan how to debug that after staring
into the code some more.
Do you have a
On 20/02/2018 8:18 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
Is there CPU hotplugging in play?
No.
I'll come back to you tomorrow with a plan how to debug that after staring
into the code some more.
Do you have a
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
>
> Is there CPU hotplugging in play?
>
> I'll come back to you tomorrow with a plan how to debug that after staring
> into the code some more.
Do you have a rough idea what the test case is doing?
Thanks,
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
>
> Is there CPU hotplugging in play?
>
> I'll come back to you tomorrow with a plan how to debug that after staring
> into the code some more.
Do you have a rough idea what the test case is doing?
Thanks,
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> We started seeing new issues in our net-device daily regression tests.
> They are related to patch [1] introduced in kernel 4.15-rc1.
>
> We frequently see a warning in dmesg [2]. Repro is not consistent, we tried to
> narrow it down to
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> We started seeing new issues in our net-device daily regression tests.
> They are related to patch [1] introduced in kernel 4.15-rc1.
>
> We frequently see a warning in dmesg [2]. Repro is not consistent, we tried to
> narrow it down to
Hi Thomas,
We started seeing new issues in our net-device daily regression tests.
They are related to patch [1] introduced in kernel 4.15-rc1.
We frequently see a warning in dmesg [2]. Repro is not consistent, we
tried to narrow it down to a smaller run but couldn't.
In addition, sometimes
Hi Thomas,
We started seeing new issues in our net-device daily regression tests.
They are related to patch [1] introduced in kernel 4.15-rc1.
We frequently see a warning in dmesg [2]. Repro is not consistent, we
tried to narrow it down to a smaller run but couldn't.
In addition, sometimes
50 matches
Mail list logo