From: "Jesse Brandeburg" <jesse.brandeburg@gmail.com>
To: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@google.com>
Cc: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@mbligh.org>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Strange errors from e1000 driver (2.6.18)
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 16:29:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4807377b0610221629kf820679re331b0a22ce05df4@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <453BF19A.5020703@google.com>
On 10/22/06, Martin J. Bligh <mbligh@google.com> wrote:
> Jesse Brandeburg wrote:
> > Analysis follows, but I wanted to ask you to bisect back if you can to
> > find the apparent patch to make the difference. Basically at this
> > point I'd say its not likely to be an e1000 issue, but I'd like to
> > follow up and make sure.
>
> That's going to be ugly, since I can't reproduce it at will. Maybe if
> I netperf it to the other box I can push it over.
try tbench with 100 sessions (from dbench package) and see if that hurts.
> > Nothing seems out of order, but the latency may be low, I'd be curious
> > what these looked like before with the old kernel. Some of the other
> > things to compare would have been the lspci -vv output from your
> > chipset with old/new kernel, in case the bridge/system configuration
> > changed. There are no known problems right now with this chipset
> > 82546EB
>
> OK. will try later when I have more time. For now I switched to the
> onboard via rhine controller.
ouch.
> > shared int, fine, but whats with the ERR: ?
>
> Hmm. Having rebooted they look rather lower. but might be a time thing.
>
> CPU0
> 0: 1405995 XT-PIC timer
> 1: 5910 XT-PIC i8042
> 2: 0 XT-PIC cascade
> 5: 0 XT-PIC uhci_hcd:usb3
> 7: 27135 XT-PIC ehci_hcd:usb2, VIA8237, eth0
> 10: 0 XT-PIC uhci_hcd:usb4, uhci_hcd:usb5,
> uhci_hcd:usb6
> 11: 0 XT-PIC ehci_hcd:usb1, uhci_hcd:usb7,
> uhci_hcd:usb8
> 12: 157547 XT-PIC i8042
> 14: 36296 XT-PIC ide0
> 15: 196690 XT-PIC ide1
> NMI: 0
> LOC: 1406006
> ERR: 26
>
> > except you didn't include any of the e1000 load information nor the
> > system's boot information as it came up.
>
> OK, it had gone since reboot, but I rebooted just now .... new info
> attached.
>
> > This chipset is one of the most frequent common elements in problem
> > reports of TX hangs for e1000. My current theory (we've bought a
> > bunch of these systems and never reproduced the issue) is that there
> > is something either design specific or BIOS specific that causes this
> > chipset to interact very badly with e1000 hardware. Some systems have
> > the issue and some don't. If you could bisect back to a working point
> > it would be interesting to see where that pointed.
>
> OK, is going to be hard to bisect, since the other one was an Ubuntu
> kernel, but I guess I can give 2.6.15 virgin a shot, at least.
thanks, I know how difficult and time consuming bisecting is.
> > doesn't seem you're overclocked. Good.
>
> Nah, I'm pretty conservative with hardware, get enough problems when
> it's all running within specs ;-)
>
> Thanks for looking at all this.
welcome, like to help when I can.
> Linux version 2.6.18 (mbligh@titus) (gcc version 3.4.6 (Ubuntu 3.4.6-1ubuntu2)) #2 Sun > e1000: eth0: e1000_clean_tx_irq: Detected Tx Unit Hang
> Tx Queue <0>
> TDH <26>
> TDT <26>
> next_to_use <26>
> next_to_clean <39>
> buffer_info[next_to_clean]
> time_stamp <77145>
> next_to_watch <3b>
> jiffies <7734f>
> next_to_watch.status <0>
> NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out
> e1000: eth0: e1000_watchdog: NIC Link is Up 100 Mbps Full Duplex
hey, this one is different. It is actually the common tx hang
signature (TDH == TDT) for these kinds of systems. I've come up with a
workaround driver, code is still in development.
you can try it if you would like.
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/download.php?group_id=42302&atid=447449&file_id=198849&aid=1463045
Thanks,
Jesse
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-22 23:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-22 18:46 Martin J. Bligh
2006-10-22 19:05 ` Martin J. Bligh
2006-10-22 20:21 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2006-10-22 20:27 ` Martin J. Bligh
2006-10-22 22:15 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2006-10-22 22:32 ` Martin J. Bligh
2006-10-22 23:29 ` Jesse Brandeburg [this message]
2006-10-22 23:02 ` Dumitru Ciobarcianu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4807377b0610221629kf820679re331b0a22ce05df4@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jesse.brandeburg@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbligh@google.com \
--cc=mbligh@mbligh.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®