From: Chris Clayton <chris2553@googlemail.com>
To: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
"Maciej S. Szmigiero" <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>
Cc: Azat Khuzhin <a3at.mail@gmail.com>,
Realtek linux nic maintainers <nic_swsd@realtek.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: R8169: Network lockups in 4.18.{8,9,10} (and 4.19 dev)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 00:32:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4e33341b-8805-80dd-26fb-1b1a4d2a3eb9@googlemail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e11f8eae-2bca-037b-9a7e-43c4276a2be6@gmail.com>
On 09/10/2018 22:39, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> On 09.10.2018 16:40, Chris Clayton wrote:
>> Thanks to Maciej and Heiner for their replies.
>>
>> On 09/10/2018 13:32, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
>>> On 07.10.2018 21:36, Chris Clayton wrote:
>>>> Hi again,
>>>>
>>>> I didn't think there was anything in 4.19-rc7 to fix this regression, but tried it anyway. I can confirm that the
>>>> regression is still present and my network still fails when, after a resume from suspend (to ram or disk), I open my
>>>> browser or my mail client. In both those cases the failure is almost immediate - e.g. my home page doesn't get displayed
>>>> in the browser. Pinging one of my ISPs name servers doesn't fail quite so quickly but the reported time increases from
>>>> 14-15ms to more than 1000ms.
>>>
>>> You can try comparing chip registers (ethtool -d eth0) in the working
>>> state (before a suspend) and in the broken state (after a resume).
>>> Maybe there will be some obvious in the difference.
>>>
>>> The same goes for the PCI configuration (lspci -d :8168 -vv).
>>>
>> Maciej suggested comparing the output from lspci -vv for the ethernet device. They are identical.
>>
>> Both Maciej and Heiner suggested comparing the output from "ethtool -d" pre and post suspend. Again, they are identical.
>> Heiner specifically suggested looking at the RxConfig. The value of that is 0x0002870e both pre and post suspend.
>>
>> I've attached files I redirected the outputs to.
>>
>> Please don't hesitate to ask for any other information needed to solve this problem. In the meantime, I've now got
>> scripts that stop the network during suspend and restart it during resume. (Those scripts were removed whilst I gathered
>> the diagnostics shown in the attachments.)
>>
> I'd like to check whether it may be a timing issue. The following experimental patch
> adds a PCI commit after writing register ChipCmd. Could you please check whether
> it changes anything?
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169.c
> index 7d3f671e1..f3c359492 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169.c
> @@ -4641,6 +4641,7 @@ static void rtl_hw_start(struct rtl8169_private *tp)
> /* Initially a 10 us delay. Turned it into a PCI commit. - FR */
> RTL_R8(tp, IntrMask);
> RTL_W8(tp, ChipCmd, CmdTxEnb | CmdRxEnb);
> + RTL_R8(tp, ChipCmd);
> rtl_init_rxcfg(tp);
> rtl_set_tx_config_registers(tp);
>
>
Sorry, this patch doesn't make any difference - my network still fails. After a suspend/resume my browsers (chromium
and firefox) both fail to open my home page (https://www.google.co.uk). The ping time for one of my ISP's name servers
increases from 14-15ms to more than 1000ms, although it after a few pings it does reduce. As the screen grab below
shows, the network does eventually fail
$ ping NS1
PING ns1 (90.207.238.97): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=0 ttl=251 time=1017.289 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=1 ttl=251 time=1018.051 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=2 ttl=251 time=1015.271 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=3 ttl=251 time=1015.495 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=6 ttl=251 time=1015.646 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=7 ttl=251 time=1022.609 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=8 ttl=251 time=1015.612 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=10 ttl=251 time=1015.551 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=12 ttl=251 time=1015.446 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=13 ttl=251 time=1015.657 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=14 ttl=251 time=1015.614 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=15 ttl=251 time=1015.651 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=17 ttl=251 time=1015.459 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=18 ttl=251 time=1015.443 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=19 ttl=251 time=1015.936 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=20 ttl=251 time=1015.681 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=22 ttl=251 time=1015.410 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=23 ttl=251 time=1015.487 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=24 ttl=251 time=1016.169 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=25 ttl=251 time=1015.659 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=26 ttl=251 time=14.606 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=30 ttl=251 time=32.765 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=31 ttl=251 time=115.052 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=33 ttl=251 time=757.115 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=34 ttl=251 time=176.696 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=35 ttl=251 time=1017.462 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=36 ttl=251 time=16.394 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=37 ttl=251 time=20.402 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=38 ttl=251 time=37.795 ms
64 bytes from 90.207.238.97: icmp_seq=39 ttl=251 time=141.997 ms
92 bytes from laptop.local.lan (192.168.0.20): Destination Host Unreachable
92 bytes from laptop.local.lan (192.168.0.20): Destination Host Unreachable
...
Chris
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-09 23:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-28 15:54 Maciej S. Szmigiero
2018-09-28 22:00 ` Chris Clayton
2018-09-28 22:13 ` Heiner Kallweit
2018-09-29 7:25 ` Chris Clayton
2018-09-29 7:38 ` Chris Clayton
2018-10-04 8:41 ` Chris Clayton
2018-10-07 19:36 ` Chris Clayton
2018-10-09 12:32 ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2018-10-09 14:40 ` Chris Clayton
2018-10-09 20:36 ` Heiner Kallweit
2018-10-10 0:24 ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2018-10-10 8:09 ` Chris Clayton
2018-10-10 8:51 ` Chris Clayton
2018-10-10 22:30 ` Chris Clayton
2018-10-10 22:32 ` Chris Clayton
2018-10-10 22:49 ` Chris Clayton
2018-10-11 0:12 ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2018-10-11 8:24 ` Chris Clayton
2018-10-11 12:23 ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2018-10-11 13:34 ` Chris Clayton
2018-10-09 21:39 ` Heiner Kallweit
2018-10-09 23:32 ` Chris Clayton [this message]
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=4e33341b-8805-80dd-26fb-1b1a4d2a3eb9@googlemail.com \
--to=chris2553@googlemail.com \
--cc=a3at.mail@gmail.com \
--cc=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mail@maciej.szmigiero.name \
--cc=nic_swsd@realtek.com \
/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®