[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: e1000 6.0.60 problems
- From: Dror Cohen <dror.xiv@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 18:02:56 +0300
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Z0L3sIjPJqBCrKmI7LdhqIVEtTFCTttGJoVaGem/8vV1xFIuZIw1sv+8RGpDIh9/YC/yoyN4lT4QaDUT0pbYQJsddG9GeTD7kjPPsD9FuQc8eg8TQkU52PTVUbcmYwXCZ63BjR4CdUd2Yas5F7Z/Hc055ISeTIqxzt/WrtvOY40=
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 8/15/05, Dror Cohen <dror.xiv@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello all,
> when using the latest 6.1.16 version of the driver (which doesn't seem
> to have the watch dog fix, but a lot of other fixes) we see similar
> results to our modified version - there are still NETDEV events with
> the "Detected Tx Unit Hang" message followed by the output of the
we just had a stuck machine with the 6.1.16 version (again, no console
, had to reboot)
var log messages looks like the one the previous halt (order
allocation failed, from e1000 irq handling). I guess this means the
backporting of the watch dog does indeed help.
> more information can be supplied if needed.
> our questions:
> * Is anyone experiencing similar problems (looks to us alot like: "[
> 955064 ] e1000 freezes Linux with 82544GC (similar to a year-old bug)") ?
forgot the link:
> * Was the watch dog change forgotten, or left out deliberetly ? Does our
> patch seems to be OK ? it is also not present in the latest version (6.1.6).
> * are the allocation problems related in anyway to e1000 problem ?
since I'm not on the linux-kernel list (but I am on the linux-net and
e1000 lists) please CC
replies to dror at xiv.co.il
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/