On Tue, 12 Mar 2013 22:53:46 + (UTC) bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org
wrote:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55131
Some business for you folks ;)
--
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
bugzilla web interface).
On Sat, 9 Oct 2010 10:07:15 GMT
bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19942
>
>Summary: Not a intel bug: kernel BUG at
>
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
bugzilla web interface).
Steinar's kernel went splat. e1000 might be implicated. It's a
2.6.38->2.6.39 regression.
On Fri, 27 May 2011 18:21:35 GMT
bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.
On Sat, 28 May 2011 00:30:30 +0200
"Steinar H. Gunderson" wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 03:17:15PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > (switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
> > bugzilla web interface).
>
> Just for reference;
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 03:14:49 +0200
From: Andrea Merello
To: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] e100: Fix inconsistency in bad frames handling
Hello!
In e100 driver it seems that the intention was to accept bad frames in
promiscuous mode and loopback mode
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
bugzilla web interface).
On Fri, 5 Aug 2011 07:07:05 GMT
bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40572
>
>Summary: Intel Gigabit Ethernet 82576 50% packet loss
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
bugzilla web interface).
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:49:14 -0700 (PDT)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10990
>
>Summary: e1000/e1000e driver doesn't work with gigabit connectio
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:38:33 +0200 Anders Grafstr__m <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Acker wrote:
> > May I ask what actual board you are using and how the e100 is connected
> > to it? I plan to test with miniPCI based e100 cards. Also, can you say
> > more about it being broke? Does it cr
On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 05:49:47 -0400 Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:38:33 +0200 Anders Grafstr__m <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> David Acker wrote:
> >>> May I ask what ac
On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:36:16 +0200 Anders Grafstr__m <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 05:49:47 -0400 Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Andrew Morton wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14
On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 11:47:51 +0100 David Vrabel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2.6.27-rc1 kernels appear to corrupt the EEPROM/NVM of the 8086:294c
> ethernet device (ICH9 I think). After hacking the driver to ignore the
> bad CRC and MAC address I could view the EEPROM with ethtool and it was
> al
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:50:15 +0100 David Vrabel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 11:47:51 +0100 David Vrabel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> 2.6.27-rc1 kernels appear to corrupt the EEPROM/NVM of the 8086:294
OTECTED]>
Adapt the e100 driver to the reworked PCI PM
* Use device_set_wakeup_enable() and friends as needed
* Use pci_pme_active() to clear PME_Status and disable PME#
* Use the observation that it is sufficient to call pci_enable_wake()
once, unless it fails
Signed-off-by: R
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
bugzilla web interface).
On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 02:42:03 -0700 (PDT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11545
>
>Summary: e1000e: Sometimes causes resume from suspend to RAM to
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
bugzilla web interface).
On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 21:56:35 -0700 (PDT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11865
>
>Summary: WOL for E100 Doesn't Work Anymore
>Product:
x86_64, CONFIG_E1000E=y.
Current Linus mainline is OK, but with linux-next I'm seeing the following:
- During boot I see a "cannot open /proc/net/dev" fly past. But when
it gets to the login prompt, I can read /proc/net/dev.
- Networking won't come up. `ifup eth0' says "determining ip addre
On Wed, 10 Dec 2008 00:43:46 +0100
Frederik Deweerdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 03:08:01PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Dec 2008 12:03:37 +0100
> > Frederik Deweerdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > It some
(cc's added)
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 12:52:51 -0800
Jan Lindheim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We have a few large linux file servers, where we have tried to use
> the Intel 10 GigE (PCI-X version) without much success. We can easily stress
> the network in a way that makes the adapter die in less tha
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
bugzilla web interface).
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 02:50:52 -0800 (PST) bugme-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12303
>
>Summary: e1000e 82567LM Tx Unit Hang
>
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 11:25:15 +0100 Andreas Mohr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > Adrian Bunk (1):
> >
> > The overdue eepro100 removal.
>
> That would be a rather pronounced NAK then? (sorry ;)
> (reason: rendering my web surfing box useless due to networking loss,
> see thread "[RFC/PATCH] e100 drive
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
bugzilla web interface).
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 03:12:01 -0800 (PST) bugme-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12570
>
>Summary: Bonding does not work over e1000e.
>
I fired up this kernel up on my FC8 laptop and I see
http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/p3130212.jpg
On the next two boot attempts, the kernel came up OK.
Also, during boot the e1000e driver has conniptions:
[ cut here ]
WARNING: at drivers/net/e1000e/ich8lan.c:408
e1000
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 15:20:44 -0700 Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 03:10:51PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > I fired up this kernel up on my FC8 laptop and I see
> > http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/p3130212.jpg
> >
> > On the next two boo
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
bugzilla web interface).
On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 06:40:54 -0700 (PDT) bugme-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12876
>
>Summary: irq 18: nobody cared after down-ing an e
(cc netdev)
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 23:05:00 +0200
Roel Kluin wrote:
> `!' has a higher precedence than `&'
>
> Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin
> ---
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> index febde45..49a9037 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> ++
On Thu, 21 May 2009 09:01:00 GMT bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13353
fyi, a recentish e100 regression.
--
Register Now for Creativity and Technology (CaT), June 3
Let's cc netdev on this.
Presumably it is a post-2.6.29 regression.
On Sun, 31 May 2009 23:59:35 +0100 Nix wrote:
> I've just compiled a 64-bit kernel for a couple of quad-core Nehalems
> (one L5520, one Core i7) for the first time. Both were using 32-bit
> kernels happily before, and one (the
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
bugzilla web interface).
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:45:38 GMT
bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13568
>
>Summary: Intel e1000 4-port NIC - unable to communicat
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
bugzilla web interface).
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:08:00 GMT
bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14684
>
>Summary: e1000e jumbo frames failure
>Prod
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
bugzilla web interface).
On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 13:04:20 GMT
bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14748
>
>Summary: e1000e NIC not working after reboot
>
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
bugzilla web interface).
On Sat, 6 Feb 2010 14:39:46 GMT
bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15239
>
>Summary: Problem with network performance after a while
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:06:07 GMT
bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15384
--
Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compili
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 16:35:25 -0400
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 16:38:09 PDT, a...@linux-foundation.org said:
> > The mm-of-the-moment snapshot 2010-07-19-16-37 has been uploaded to
> >
> >http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/mmotm/
>
> Throws a warning at boot:
>
> [
33 matches
Mail list logo
