Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] v4.15-rc2 on thinkpad x60: ethernet stopped
 working
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>, jacob.e.keller@intel.com
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, bpoirier@suse.com,
        nix.or.die@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org,
        lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
References: <20171210083949.GA3872@amd>
 <d1ae924b-4d8f-a787-4c07-1f2db91482e5@gmail.com> <20171215092849.GB15090@amd>
 <20171215.105210.103516329605719086.davem@davemloft.net>
 <20171218102657.GB5338@amd> <5c0be4c4-5a56-cc7b-7b5a-345f446e788e@intel.com>
 <20171218115817.GA17054@amd>
From: "Neftin, Sasha" <sasha.neftin@intel.com>
Message-ID: <077087f2-551a-c045-6b07-b1b661e53dad@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 17:50:19 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20171218115817.GA17054@amd>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2064
Lines: 53

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.