On Mon 2017-12-18 13:24:40, Neftin, Sasha wrote:
> On 12/18/2017 12:26, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >Hi!
> >
> >>>>>In v4.15-rc2+, network manager can not see my ethernet card, and
> >>>>>manual attempts to ifconfig it up did not really help, either.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Card is:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82573L Gigabit Ethernet
> >>>>>Controller
> >>>....
> >>>>>Any ideas ?
> >>>>Yes , 19110cfbb34d4af0cdfe14cd243f3b09dc95b013 broke it.
> >>>>
> >>>>See:
> >>>>https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198047
> >>>>
> >>>>Fix there :
> >>>>https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=151272209903675&w=2
> >>>I don't see the patch in latest mainline. Not having ethernet
> >>>is... somehow annoying. What is going on there?
> >>Generally speaking, e1000 maintainence has been handled very poorly over
> >>the past few years, I have to say.
> >>
> >>Fixes take forever to propagate even when someone other than the
> >>maintainer provides a working and tested fix, just like this case.
> >>
> >>Jeff, please take e1000 maintainence seriously and get these critical
> >>bug fixes propagated.
> >No response AFAICT. I guess I should test reverting
> >19110cfbb34d4af0cdfe14cd243f3b09dc95b013, then ask you for revert?
>
> Hello Pavel,
>
> Before ask for reverting 19110cfbb..., please, check if follow patch of
> Benjamin work for you http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/846825/
Jacob said, in another email:
# Digging into this, the problem is complicated. The original bug
# assumed behavior of the .check_for_link call, which is universally not
# implemented.
#
# I think the correct fix is to revert 19110cfbb34d ("e1000e: Separate
# signaling for link check/link up", 2017-10-10) and find a more proper solution.
...which makes me think that revert is preffered?
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Jeff was out sick last week. It might take him a bit to catch up.
I'll remind him when I see him next (which I hope is soon).
Todd Fujinaka
Software Application Engineer
Datacenter Engineering Group
Intel Corporation
[email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Neftin, Sasha
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 7:50 AM
To: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>; Keller, Jacob E <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; David Miller <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] v4.15-rc2 on thinkpad x60: ethernet stopped working
On 12/18/2017 13:58, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2017-12-18 13:24:40, Neftin, Sasha wrote:
>> On 12/18/2017 12:26, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>>>>>> In v4.15-rc2+, network manager can not see my ethernet card, and
>>>>>>> manual attempts to ifconfig it up did not really help, either.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Card is:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82573L Gigabit
>>>>>>> Ethernet Controller
>>>>> ....
>>>>>>> Any ideas ?
>>>>>> Yes , 19110cfbb34d4af0cdfe14cd243f3b09dc95b013 broke it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See:
>>>>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198047
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fix there :
>>>>>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=151272209903675&w=2
>>>>> I don't see the patch in latest mainline. Not having ethernet
>>>>> is... somehow annoying. What is going on there?
>>>> Generally speaking, e1000 maintainence has been handled very poorly
>>>> over the past few years, I have to say.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes take forever to propagate even when someone other than the
>>>> maintainer provides a working and tested fix, just like this case.
>>>>
>>>> Jeff, please take e1000 maintainence seriously and get these
>>>> critical bug fixes propagated.
>>> No response AFAICT. I guess I should test reverting
>>> 19110cfbb34d4af0cdfe14cd243f3b09dc95b013, then ask you for revert?
>> Hello Pavel,
>>
>> Before ask for reverting 19110cfbb..., please, check if follow patch
>> of Benjamin work for you http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/846825/
> Jacob said, in another email:
>
> # Digging into this, the problem is complicated. The original bug #
> assumed behavior of the .check_for_link call, which is universally not
> # implemented.
> #
> # I think the correct fix is to revert 19110cfbb34d ("e1000e: Separate
> # signaling for link check/link up", 2017-10-10) and find a more proper solution.
>
> ...which makes me think that revert is preffered?
>
> Pavel
>
Pavel, before ask for revert - let's check Benjamin's patch following to his previous patch. Previous patch was not competed and latest one come to complete changes.
_______________________________________________
Intel-wired-lan mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-wired-lan
On 12/18/2017 13:58, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2017-12-18 13:24:40, Neftin, Sasha wrote:
>> On 12/18/2017 12:26, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>>>>>> In v4.15-rc2+, network manager can not see my ethernet card, and
>>>>>>> manual attempts to ifconfig it up did not really help, either.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Card is:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82573L Gigabit Ethernet
>>>>>>> Controller
>>>>> ....
>>>>>>> Any ideas ?
>>>>>> Yes , 19110cfbb34d4af0cdfe14cd243f3b09dc95b013 broke it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See:
>>>>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198047
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fix there :
>>>>>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=151272209903675&w=2
>>>>> I don't see the patch in latest mainline. Not having ethernet
>>>>> is... somehow annoying. What is going on there?
>>>> Generally speaking, e1000 maintainence has been handled very poorly over
>>>> the past few years, I have to say.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes take forever to propagate even when someone other than the
>>>> maintainer provides a working and tested fix, just like this case.
>>>>
>>>> Jeff, please take e1000 maintainence seriously and get these critical
>>>> bug fixes propagated.
>>> No response AFAICT. I guess I should test reverting
>>> 19110cfbb34d4af0cdfe14cd243f3b09dc95b013, then ask you for revert?
>> Hello Pavel,
>>
>> Before ask for reverting 19110cfbb..., please, check if follow patch of
>> Benjamin work for you http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/846825/
> Jacob said, in another email:
>
> # Digging into this, the problem is complicated. The original bug
> # assumed behavior of the .check_for_link call, which is universally not
> # implemented.
> #
> # I think the correct fix is to revert 19110cfbb34d ("e1000e: Separate
> # signaling for link check/link up", 2017-10-10) and find a more proper solution.
>
> ...which makes me think that revert is preffered?
>
> Pavel
>
Pavel, before ask for revert - let's check Benjamin's patch following to
his previous patch. Previous patch was not competed and latest one come
to complete changes.
On 12/18/2017 17:50, Neftin, Sasha wrote:
> On 12/18/2017 13:58, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> On Mon 2017-12-18 13:24:40, Neftin, Sasha wrote:
>>> On 12/18/2017 12:26, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>>>>>> In v4.15-rc2+, network manager can not see my ethernet card, and
>>>>>>>> manual attempts to ifconfig it up did not really help, either.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Card is:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82573L Gigabit
>>>>>>>> Ethernet
>>>>>>>> Controller
>>>>>> ....
>>>>>>>> Any ideas ?
>>>>>>> Yes , 19110cfbb34d4af0cdfe14cd243f3b09dc95b013 broke it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> See:
>>>>>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198047
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fix there :
>>>>>>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=151272209903675&w=2
>>>>>> I don't see the patch in latest mainline. Not having ethernet
>>>>>> is... somehow annoying. What is going on there?
>>>>> Generally speaking, e1000 maintainence has been handled very
>>>>> poorly over
>>>>> the past few years, I have to say.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes take forever to propagate even when someone other than the
>>>>> maintainer provides a working and tested fix, just like this case.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff, please take e1000 maintainence seriously and get these critical
>>>>> bug fixes propagated.
>>>> No response AFAICT. I guess I should test reverting
>>>> 19110cfbb34d4af0cdfe14cd243f3b09dc95b013, then ask you for revert?
>>> Hello Pavel,
>>>
>>> Before ask for reverting 19110cfbb..., please, check if follow patch of
>>> Benjamin work for you http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/846825/
>> Jacob said, in another email:
>>
>> # Digging into this, the problem is complicated. The original bug
>> # assumed behavior of the .check_for_link call, which is universally not
>> # implemented.
>> #
>> # I think the correct fix is to revert 19110cfbb34d ("e1000e: Separate
>> # signaling for link check/link up", 2017-10-10) and find a more
>> proper solution.
>>
>> ...which makes me think that revert is preffered?
>>
>> Pavel
>>
> Pavel, before ask for revert - let's check Benjamin's patch following
> to his previous patch. Previous patch was not competed and latest one
> come to complete changes.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-wired-lan mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-wired-lan
Pavel, any update? Is Benjamin's last patch solved your network problem?
Hi!
> >> Before ask for reverting 19110cfbb..., please, check if follow patch
> >> of Benjamin work for you http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/846825/
> >
> Pavel, before ask for revert - let's check Benjamin's patch following to his previous patch. Previous patch was not competed and latest one come to complete changes.
>
v4.15-rc4+:
Ethernet works with 19110cfbb reverted.
Ethernet works With patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/846825/ applied.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
On Wed 2017-12-20 16:54:21, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > >> Before ask for reverting 19110cfbb..., please, check if follow patch
> > >> of Benjamin work for you http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/846825/
>
> > >
> > Pavel, before ask for revert - let's check Benjamin's patch following to his previous patch. Previous patch was not competed and latest one come to complete changes.
> >
>
> v4.15-rc4+:
>
> Ethernet works with 19110cfbb reverted.
>
> Ethernet works With patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/846825/ applied.
Hmm. So... ethernet originally did not work with patch/846825/ applied
or 19110cfbb reverted, so I re-plugged ethernet cables. Now it works
even with plain v4.15-rc4+.
So it looks like the bug was fixed in the mainline in the meantime...?
Sorry for the noise,
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
On 20/12/2017 18:01, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Wed 2017-12-20 16:54:21, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>>>>> Before ask for reverting 19110cfbb..., please, check if follow patch
>>>>> of Benjamin work for you http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/846825/
>>> Pavel, before ask for revert - let's check Benjamin's patch following to his previous patch. Previous patch was not competed and latest one come to complete changes.
>>>
>> v4.15-rc4+:
>>
>> Ethernet works with 19110cfbb reverted.
>>
>> Ethernet works With patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/846825/ applied.
> Hmm. So... ethernet originally did not work with patch/846825/ applied
> or 19110cfbb reverted, so I re-plugged ethernet cables. Now it works
> even with plain v4.15-rc4+.
>
> So it looks like the bug was fixed in the mainline in the meantime...?
>
> Sorry for the noise,
> Pavel
Good Pavel, thanks for update us, let's keep both patch applied and see
ethernet adapter behavior.