Bug#311758: kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686-smp: network interfaces down = machine needs hard reboot
forwarded 311758 http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6295 thanks Hi Marc, Based on your notes I was able to reproduce the bug with vanilla kernel. I've submitted the bug upstream, you can view it (and add your comments) at http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6295 I will try to build the kernel with a working config you've posted before and will add it to the bug if successful. Thanks and best regards, Jurij Smakov[EMAIL PROTECTED] Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Bug#311758: kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686-smp: network interfaces down = machine needs hard reboot
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: forwarded 311758 http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6295 Bug#311758: kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686-smp: network interfaces down = machine needs hard reboot Bug#323860: unregister_netdevice: waiting for vpn0 to become free. Usage count = 23 Bug#338973: unregister_netdevice: waiting for vpn0 to become free. Usage count = 23 Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6295. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#311758: kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686-smp: network interfaces down = machine needs hard reboot
On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 04:38:34PM -0800, Jurij Smakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is this problem happening with Debian kernels only, As I wrote before (quite a number of times actually: it would really help if the people acting on this bug would read the bugreport and its history, all the required information is there and has been repeated by me a number of times. This would have save both you and me (and others) valuable time because you wouldn't have to wait for my answer to a question that has been answered a number of times already), it does not happen in the kernels I compile myself, although I am convinced that the bug is in the upstream kernel. I don't know for sure, though, I _do_ know that all debian kernels are buggy, and none of my own. with the upstream (vanilla) kernels too? If the problem is not Debian-specific, I don't see much sense in having that bug open in Debian BTS, since gvpe is not packaged for Debian. That makes no sense at all. In general, debian maintainers follow the policy that bugs in debian should be reported against the debian bts, regardless of wether they are upstream or not (what else is the point of having an upstream tag if those bugs should not be kept in the bts? after all, they _are_ bugs in debian). I also don't quite see why packaging gvpe could make a difference, because its not gvpe that is buggy, but the debian kernel (and if at all, iproute causes it, not gvpe, and that is definitely packaged within debian. It does not matter _who_ adds those entries to the arp table, be it ip or arp). The only effect of removing such bugs would be to lose track of those bugs and misinform debian users by hiding valid bugs. I thinkt hat would be a great disservice to the users. The strength of the debian bts is precisely that it documents known bugs in debian, not that it hides that info. I hope you understand that keeping valid bugreports has great value, far greater than the possible pride of having a (superficially) bug-free package. The loss for other people who are suffering from the same or similar bugs would be big. -- The choice of a -==- _GNU_ ==-- _ generation Marc Lehmann ---==---(_)__ __ __ [EMAIL PROTECTED] --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / http://schmorp.de/ -=/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#311758: kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686-smp: network interfaces down = machine needs hard reboot
merge 311758 323860 thanks On Sun, 26 Mar 2006, Marc Lehmann wrote: On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 04:38:34PM -0800, Jurij Smakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is this problem happening with Debian kernels only, As I wrote before (quite a number of times actually: it would really help if the people acting on this bug would read the bugreport and its history, all the required information is there and has been repeated by me a number of times. This would have save both you and me (and others) valuable time because you wouldn't have to wait for my answer to a question that has been answered a number of times already), it does not happen in the kernels I compile myself, although I am convinced that the bug is in the upstream kernel. I don't know for sure, though, I _do_ know that all debian kernels are buggy, and none of my own. Ok, I have to apologize for not digging in BTS hard enough. In the future though please consider using the BTS version tracking feature to indicate that the problem is still present in the newer kernels, instead of filing a totally new bug. That way all the relevant information will be in one collected in one place. The only effect of removing such bugs would be to lose track of those bugs and misinform debian users by hiding valid bugs. I thinkt hat would be a great disservice to the users. The strength of the debian bts is precisely that it documents known bugs in debian, not that it hides that info. I hope you understand that keeping valid bugreports has great value, far greater than the possible pride of having a (superficially) bug-free package. The loss for other people who are suffering from the same or similar bugs would be big. You have a point here, I agree. I shouldn't have suggested to close this bug. But the way I see it, you are the only person so far hitting it, while using one particular application, which is not packaged for Debian. Given that there are probably quite a few VPN/IP tunneling users out there, it raises questions about whether this application might be at fault (no offense intended, I know that you are the upstream author :-). Now to something constructive. I'm willing to work on this bug and try to reproduce and hopefully resolve it. It would help me a lot if you would describe a simplest gvpe setup in which the bug can be reproduced, so that I can build a few kernels interpolating between the Debian config and the working config which you posted earlier, and try to figure out which config option causes it. That'll hopefully give us some insight. Best regards, Jurij Smakov[EMAIL PROTECTED] Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Bug#311758: kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686-smp: network interfaces down = machine needs hard reboot
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: merge 311758 323860 Bug#311758: kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686-smp: network interfaces down = machine needs hard reboot Bug#323860: unregister_netdevice: waiting for vpn0 to become free. Usage count = 23 Bug#338973: unregister_netdevice: waiting for vpn0 to become free. Usage count = 23 Merged 311758 323860 338973. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#311758: kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686-smp: network interfaces down = machine needs hard reboot
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, Marc Lehmann wrote: I never heard about the version tracking mechanism, where I can I learn about it, and how can I use it e.g. from reportbug? I was advised to resubmit bugs for newer kernel versions, maybe the version tracking mechanism is new? In any case, that would probably a great help to me (and others :) I'm not sure how to do it from reportbug. Most of the bug manipulation is accomplished by emailing [EMAIL PROTECTED], more information is available at http://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control. Basically, sending a message like this: foung 123456 2.6.15-1 thanks to [EMAIL PROTECTED] will mark that the bug 123456 has been also found in version of 2.6.15-1 of the package. You can include such a snippet at the top of your normal bug communication and just CC it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Filing a new bug for every new version of the package containing it is *not* a good idea. How do you propose how a user space application can bring the kernel into a state where it cannot recover except by rebooting just by using a published network API? Without a kernel bug being involved? How would that be logically possible? GVPE might be buggy as hell as much as we are concerned, but there is no way this canot be a kernel bug, too, regardless of what triggered it. And it should be of no consequence that gvpe isn't being packages with debian, unless debian suddenly gets the official policy that bugs triggered by using third-party programs or doing program development on debian are not to be reported against debian. That makes zero sense. Besides, gvpe doesn't do anything besides calling a shell script that in turn calls ip, which I have explained in detail. I'm willing to work on this bug and try to reproduce and hopefully resolve it. Its very easy to reproduce here without any special software. It would help me a lot if you would describe a simplest gvpe setup in which the bug can be reproduced, so that As I wrote before, gvpe isn't required, I analyzed the problem and pointed out that the neighbour cache keeps references to the network device when its going down thatc annot be removed. Ok, my fault again. I've missed this information in bug 338973. Sorry if I sound a bit frustrated, but this bug is old, and likely close to trivial to fix. It _obviously_ is a kernel bug. It is a bug in the debian kernel, and I am frustrated of people wanting to close valid bug reports just because its triggered by a non-debian program (as are a lot of bugs), which is extremely deconstructive to improving debian or any free software package. I am a bit frustrated that I get the same questions over and over while having provided enough info to exactly pinpoint the problem already. I'm sorry it have come to that. We do look at the bugs whenever we have time to do that, and since there are too many of them, it involves making quick decision based on information immediately available in the bug. Since information about your bug has been now scattered over 4 different bug reports, I've clearly made some bad calls :-). I'll review the available information once again and hopefully we'll be able to finally move ahead with it. Best regards, Jurij Smakov[EMAIL PROTECTED] Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#311758: kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686-smp: network interfaces down = machine needs hard reboot
Hi Marc, Is this problem happening with Debian kernels only, or you experience it with the upstream (vanilla) kernels too? If the problem is not Debian-specific, I don't see much sense in having that bug open in Debian BTS, since gvpe is not packaged for Debian. Best regards, Jurij Smakov[EMAIL PROTECTED] Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#311758: kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686-smp: network interfaces down = machine needs hard reboot
Hi! Could you please retest with a current kernel (testing:2.6.12, unstable:2.6.14)? MfG David -- - hallo... wie gehts heute? - *hust* gut *rotz* *keuch* - gott sei dank kommunizieren wir über ein septisches medium ;) -- Matthias Leeb, Uni f. angewandte Kunst, 2005-02-15
