Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755946AbYAQJkf (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jan 2008 04:40:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751588AbYAQJkY (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jan 2008 04:40:24 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:43870 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751132AbYAQJkW (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jan 2008 04:40:22 -0500 Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:40:07 -0200 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: David Miller Cc: elendil@planet.nl, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, slavon@bigtelecom.ru, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] 2.6.24-rc7: e1000: Detected Tx Unit Hang Message-ID: <20080117094007.GF321@ghostprotocols.net> Mail-Followup-To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , David Miller , elendil@planet.nl, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, slavon@bigtelecom.ru, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <36D9DB17C6DE9E40B059440DB8D95F520432DA91@orsmsx418.amr.corp.intel.com> <20080116.232037.261622584.davem@davemloft.net> <200801170851.56029.elendil@planet.nl> <20080117.000002.37027317.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080117.000002.37027317.davem@davemloft.net> X-Url: http://oops.ghostprotocols.net:81/blog User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2001 Lines: 54 Em Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 12:00:02AM -0800, David Miller escreveu: > From: Frans Pop > Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 08:51:55 +0100 > > > On Thursday 17 January 2008, David Miller wrote: > > > From: "Brandeburg, Jesse" > > > > > > > We spent Wednesday trying to reproduce (without the patch) these issues > > > > without much luck, and have applied the patch cleanly and will continue > > > > testing it. Given the simplicity of the changes, and the community > > > > testing, I'll give my ack and we will continue testing. > > > > > > You need a slow CPU, and you need to make sure you do actually > > > trigger the TX limiting code there. > > > > Hmmm. Is a dual core Pentium D 3.20GHz considered slow these days? > > No of course :-) I guess it therefore depends upon the load > as well. I saw it just once, yesterday: [root@doppio ~]# uname -r 2.6.24-rc5 e1000: eth0: e1000_clean_tx_irq: Detected Tx Unit Hang Tx Queue <0> TDH <58> TDT <8f> next_to_use <8f> next_to_clean <55> buffer_info[next_to_clean] time_stamp <105e973a9> next_to_watch <56> jiffies <105e97992> next_to_watch.status <1> [root@doppio ~]# on a lenovo T60W, core2duo machine (2GHz), when using it to stress test another machine, I was using netperf TCP_STREAM ranging from 1 to 8 streams + a ping -f using various packet sizes. I'll update this machine today to 2.6.24-rc8-git + net-2.6 and try again to reproduce. I also applied David's patch while trying some RT experiments on another, 8 way machine used as a server, but on this machine I didn't experience the Tx Unit Hang message with or without the patch. - Arnaldo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/