Re: [BUG] oops in net_rx_action on 64-bit powerpc
From: Chris Friesen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 18:13:54 -0600 [PATCH] fix amd8111e rx return code The amd8111e rx poll routine currently mishandles the case when we process exactly the number of packets specified in the budget. This patch is basically as suggested by David Miller. Signed-off-by: Chris Friesen [EMAIL PROTECTED] I had to apply this by hand because your email client heavily corrupted the patch. Thanks. ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [BUG] oops in net_rx_action on 64-bit powerpc
David Miller wrote: From: Chris Friesen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 18:13:54 -0600 [PATCH] fix amd8111e rx return code The amd8111e rx poll routine currently mishandles the case when we process exactly the number of packets specified in the budget. This patch is basically as suggested by David Miller. Signed-off-by: Chris Friesen [EMAIL PROTECTED] I had to apply this by hand because your email client heavily corrupted the patch. Crap. Sorry about that, it looks like I forgot to set my line-wrap to 0 before creating the email. @#$#% Thunderbird. Chris ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [BUG] oops in net_rx_action on 64-bit powerpc
David Miller wrote:
Probably the simplest fix is to get rid of the rx_not_empty label and
protect the entire:
/* Receive descriptor is empty now */
spin_lock_irqsave(lp-lock, flags);
__netif_rx_complete(dev, napi);
writel(VAL0|RINTEN0, mmio + INTEN0);
writel(VAL2 | RDMD0, mmio + CMD0);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(lp-lock, flags);
code block with a test such as:
if (rx_pkt_limit 0)
(yes, greater than zero, not = 0)
then replace the rx_not_empty goto with a simple break.
Are you sure about that? Doing that, if we --rx_pkt_limit 0 we'll only
break out of the inner while loop. We then check then interrupt status
register and potentially loop through the do/while loop again (maybe
decrementing rx_pkt_limit again) even though we've used up our budget.
If I leave the label and jump and just add the rx_pkt_limit 0 test, it
seems to work.
Chris
From: Chris Friesen[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PATCH] fix amd8111e rx return code
The amd8111e rx poll routine currently mishandles the case when we process
exactly the number of packets specified in the budget.
This patch is basically as suggested by David Miller.
Signed-off-by: Chris Friesen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
diff --git a/drivers/net/amd8111e.c b/drivers/net/amd8111e.c
index c54967f..ba1be0b 100644
--- a/drivers/net/amd8111e.c
+++ b/drivers/net/amd8111e.c
@@ -833,12 +833,14 @@ static int amd8111e_rx_poll(struct napi_struct *napi,
int budget)
} while(intr0 RINT0);
- /* Receive descriptor is empty now */
- spin_lock_irqsave(lp-lock, flags);
- __netif_rx_complete(dev, napi);
- writel(VAL0|RINTEN0, mmio + INTEN0);
- writel(VAL2 | RDMD0, mmio + CMD0);
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(lp-lock, flags);
+ if (rx_pkt_limit 0) {
+ /* Receive descriptor is empty now */
+ spin_lock_irqsave(lp-lock, flags);
+ __netif_rx_complete(dev, napi);
+ writel(VAL0|RINTEN0, mmio + INTEN0);
+ writel(VAL2 | RDMD0, mmio + CMD0);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(lp-lock, flags);
+ }
rx_not_empty:
return num_rx_pkt;
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [BUG] oops in net_rx_action on 64-bit powerpc
David Miller wrote: From: Brandeburg, Jesse [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 14:50:06 -0700 Chris Friesen wrote: I tried booting a post 2.6.27 -git on a Motorola ATCA6101 (very similar to a Maple board). The first time I booted I got the first log below via the serial console. I rebooted and got as far as a login prompt. I was able to log in via the serial console, but then got an almost identical oops again, as shown in the second log below. I configed out the gigE drivers for the backplane so the only remaining network link was the e100 link used for booting, but the problem remained. Anyone have any idea what might be causing this? Thanks, Chris Starting xinetd: [ OK ] Starting cron: [ OK ] Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address 0x00100108 that 00100108 pattern looks familiar, I'm not much help here, but I think that had something to do with the list management of the poll_list in a netdev struct. so now you just have to figure out why someone's netdev struct is becoming NULL. :-) Usually this is an indication of returning the wrong value from the driver's -poll() routine. Looks like I was wrong before...the remaining ethernet link is an AMD-8111, not an e100. Sorry about that. I backed out 6ba33ac amd8111e: delete non NAPI code from the driver. With NAPI disabled, the blade appears stable. With NAPI enabled, the original problem recurred. So...it would appear that the NAPI code is somehow buggy, and 6ba33ac should probably be reverted until the problem is found and fixed. Chris ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [BUG] oops in net_rx_action on 64-bit powerpc
From: Chris Friesen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 17:39:00 -0600 So...it would appear that the NAPI code is somehow buggy, and 6ba33ac should probably be reverted until the problem is found and fixed. No I think the problem is simple enough that someone should study the -poll() routine quickly and audit it's return values. ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
RE: [BUG] oops in net_rx_action on 64-bit powerpc
Chris Friesen wrote: I tried booting a post 2.6.27 -git on a Motorola ATCA6101 (very similar to a Maple board). The first time I booted I got the first log below via the serial console. I rebooted and got as far as a login prompt. I was able to log in via the serial console, but then got an almost identical oops again, as shown in the second log below. I configed out the gigE drivers for the backplane so the only remaining network link was the e100 link used for booting, but the problem remained. Anyone have any idea what might be causing this? Thanks, Chris Starting xinetd: [ OK ] Starting cron: [ OK ] Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address 0x00100108 that 00100108 pattern looks familiar, I'm not much help here, but I think that had something to do with the list management of the poll_list in a netdev struct. so now you just have to figure out why someone's netdev struct is becoming NULL. :-) Faulting instruction address: 0xc028c1cc Oops: Kernel access of bad area, sig: 11 [#1] SMP NR_CPUS=2 Maple Modules linked in: NIP: c028c1cc LR: c028c13c CTR: REGS: cfff7b90 TRAP: 0300 Not tainted (2.6.27-05329-g39076ba) MSR: 90009032 EE,ME,IR,DR CR: 2224 XER: 2000 DAR: 00100108, DSISR: 0a00 TASK = c0017a061080[0] 'swapper' THREAD: c0017a078000 CPU: 1 GPR00: cfff7e10 c059bfe0 0020 GPR04: 0001 c00178179800 c027fda8 GPR08: 00200200 0001 00100100 GPR12: 2222 c05bc500 GPR16: GPR20: 000a 0001 0001 GPR24: c05a2280 c05f5134 fffd9bbe 00ec GPR28: c6e30c28 0020 c0543440 c0017a279b40 NIP [c028c1cc] .net_rx_action+0x1e4/0x26c LR [c028c13c] .net_rx_action+0x154/0x26c Call Trace: [cfff7e10] [c028c13c] .net_rx_action+0x154/0x26c (unreliable) [cfff7ec0] [c0056938] .__do_softirq+0xf8/0x1f4 [cfff7f90] [c0024334] .call_do_softirq+0x14/0x24 [c0017a07b970] [c000bcdc] .do_softirq+0xf0/0x104 [c0017a07ba10] [c0056ae8] .irq_exit+0x70/0x88 [c0017a07ba90] [c000ba18] .do_IRQ+0x14c/0x244 [c0017a07bb30] [c0004710] hardware_interrupt_entry+0x18/0x1c --- Exception: 501 at .raw_local_irq_restore+0x38/0x44 LR = .cpu_idle+0xd8/0x154 [c0017a07be20] [c0012068] .cpu_idle+0x118/0x154 (unreliable) [c0017a07bec0] [c03d4304] .start_secondary+0x310/0x3e8 [c0017a07bf90] [c00072b4] .start_secondary_prolog+0x10/0x14 Instruction dump: eb61ffd8 eb81ffe0 eba1ffe8 ebc1fff0 ebe1fff8 7c0803a6 4e800020 e81f0010 7809ffe3 40820038 e93f0008 e97f f92b0008 f969 e95c0008 fb9f [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/root uname -a Linux 10.41.18.77 2.6.27-05329-g39076ba #1 SMP Tue Oct 21 16:46:06 CST 2008 ppc64 GNU/Linux [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/root Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address 0x00100108 Faulting instruction address: 0xc028c1cc Oops: Kernel access of bad area, sig: 11 [#1] SMP NR_CPUS=2 Maple Modules linked in: NIP: c028c1cc LR: c028c13c CTR: REGS: cfff7b90 TRAP: 0300 Not tainted (2.6.27-05329-g39076ba) MSR: 90009032 EE,ME,IR,DR CR: 2224 XER: 2000 DAR: 00100108, DSISR: 0a00 TASK = c0017a061080[0] 'swapper' THREAD: c0017a078000 CPU: 1 GPR00: cfff7e10 c059bfe0 0020 GPR04: 0001 0001 c027fda8 GPR08: 00200200 0001 00100100 GPR12: 2222 c05bc500 GPR16: GPR20: 000a 0001 0001 GPR24: c05a2280 c05f5134 0001000387ff 010c GPR28: c6e30c28 0020 c0543440 c0017a2b0b40 NIP [c028c1cc] .net_rx_action+0x1e4/0x26c LR [c028c13c] .net_rx_action+0x154/0x26c Call Trace: [cfff7e10] [c028c13c] .net_rx_action+0x154/0x26c (unreliable) [cfff7ec0] [c0056938] .__do_softirq+0xf8/0x1f4 [cfff7f90] [c0024334] .call_do_softirq+0x14/0x24 [c0017a07b970] [c000bcdc] .do_softirq+0xf0/0x104 [c0017a07ba10] [c0056ae8] .irq_exit+0x70/0x88 [c0017a07ba90] [c000ba18] .do_IRQ+0x14c/0x244 [c0017a07bb30] [c0004710] hardware_interrupt_entry+0x18/0x1c --- Exception: 501 at
Re: [BUG] oops in net_rx_action on 64-bit powerpc
From: Brandeburg, Jesse [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 14:50:06 -0700 Chris Friesen wrote: I tried booting a post 2.6.27 -git on a Motorola ATCA6101 (very similar to a Maple board). The first time I booted I got the first log below via the serial console. I rebooted and got as far as a login prompt. I was able to log in via the serial console, but then got an almost identical oops again, as shown in the second log below. I configed out the gigE drivers for the backplane so the only remaining network link was the e100 link used for booting, but the problem remained. Anyone have any idea what might be causing this? Thanks, Chris Starting xinetd: [ OK ] Starting cron: [ OK ] Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address 0x00100108 that 00100108 pattern looks familiar, I'm not much help here, but I think that had something to do with the list management of the poll_list in a netdev struct. so now you just have to figure out why someone's netdev struct is becoming NULL. :-) Usually this is an indication of returning the wrong value from the driver's -poll() routine. ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
