On 25/06/18 03:28PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 02:17:32AM +0200, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > > On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 01:28:36AM +0200, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > > > On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 01:13:28AM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote: > > > > Dear Marek, dear Vitaly, > > > > > > > > > > > > Am 09.05.25 um 00:41 schrieb Marek Marczykowski-Górecki: > > > > > On Thu, May 08, 2025 at 09:26:18AM +0300, Lifshits, Vitaly > > > > > > On 4/21/2025 4:28 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 03:19:12PM +0200, Marek > > > > > > > Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 03:44:02PM +0300, Lifshits, Vitaly > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 4/16/2025 3:43 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 03:09:39PM +0300, Lifshits, Vitaly > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Can you please also share the output of ethtool -i? I > > > > > > > > > > > would like to know the > > > > > > > > > > > NVM version that you have on your device. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > driver: e1000e > > > > > > > > > > version: 6.14.1+ > > > > > > > > > > firmware-version: 1.1-4 > > > > > > > > > > expansion-rom-version: > > > > > > > > > > bus-info: 0000:00:1f.6 > > > > > > > > > > supports-statistics: yes > > > > > > > > > > supports-test: yes > > > > > > > > > > supports-eeprom-access: yes > > > > > > > > > > supports-register-dump: yes > > > > > > > > > > supports-priv-flags: yes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your firmware version is not the latest, can you check with > > > > > > > > > the board > > > > > > > > > manufacturer if there is a BIOS update to your system? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can check, but still, it's a regression in the Linux driver - > > > > > > > > old > > > > > > > > kernel did work perfectly well on this hw. Maybe new driver > > > > > > > > tries to use > > > > > > > > some feature that is missing (or broken) in the old firmware? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A little bit of context: I'm maintaining the kernel package for a > > > > > > > Qubes > > > > > > > OS distribution. While I can try to update firmware on my test > > > > > > > system, I > > > > > > > have no influence on what hardware users will use this kernel, and > > > > > > > which firmware version they will use (and whether all the vendors > > > > > > > provide newer firmware at all). I cannot ship a kernel that is > > > > > > > known > > > > > > > to break network on some devices. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, you mentioned that on another system this issue doesn't > > > > > > > > > reproduce, do > > > > > > > > > they have the same firmware version? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The other one has also 1.1-4 firmware. And I re-checked, e1000e > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > 6.14.2 works fine there. > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for your detailed feedback and for providing the requested > > > > > > information. > > > > > > > > > > > > We have conducted extensive testing of this patch across multiple > > > > > > systems > > > > > > and have not observed any packet loss issues. Upon comparing the > > > > > > mentioned > > > > > > setups, we noted that while the LAN controller is similar, the CPU > > > > > > differs. > > > > > > We believe that the issue may be related to transitions in the > > > > > > CPU's low > > > > > > power states. > > > > > > > > > > > > Consequently, we kindly request that you disable the CPU low power > > > > > > state > > > > > > transitions in the S0 system state and verify if the issue > > > > > > persists. You can > > > > > > disable this in the kernel parameters on the command line with > > > > > > idle=poll. > > > > > > Please note that this command is intended for debugging purposes > > > > > > only, as it > > > > > > may result in higher power consumption. > > > > > > > > > > I tried with idle=poll, and it didn't help, I still see a lot of > > > > > packet > > > > > losses. But I can also confirm that idle=poll makes the system use > > > > > significantly more power (previously at 25-30W, with this option stays > > > > > at about 42W). > > > > > > > > > > Is there any other info I can provide, enable some debug features or > > > > > something? > > > > > > > > > > I see the problem is with receiving packets - in my simple ping test, > > > > > the ping target sees all the echo requests (and respond to them), but > > > > > the responses aren't reaching ping back (and are not visible on > > > > > tcpdump > > > > > on the problematic system either). > > > > > > > > As the cause is still unclear, can the commit please be reverted in the > > > > master branch due adhere to Linux’ no-regression policy, so that it can > > > > be > > > > reverted from the stable series? > > > > > > > > Marek, did you also test 6.15 release candidates? > > > > > > The last test I did was on 6.15-rc3. I can re-test on -rc5. > > > > Same with 6.15-rc5. > > And the same issue still applies to 6.16-rc2. FWIW Qubes OS kernel has > this buggy patch revered and nobody complained (contrary to the version > with the patch included). Should I submit the revert patch?
Just submit a revert then 👍 I have no authority here, but had good experience with just sending a revert patch in the past 🤗 Cheers, Chris
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
