Re: [Bug 60555] New: Some amount of ifconfig cause load averageincrease and system freeze

[Bjorn Helgaas]

On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 5:24 AM, Yaroslav Molochko <onorua@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Sorry. I was not using this machine for quite a bit, I've updated to the new
> kernel and updated bug with the information you asked

Thanks.

Note that this appears to be vanilla v3.12, which has e1000e version
2.3.2-k in it.  Intel maintains newer drivers out-of-tree at
http://sourceforge.net/projects/e1000/, and it's possible this is some
bug that has already been fixed.  The current version there looks like
e1000e-2.5.4, released 2013-09-05.

I think only the Intel folks can help you out with this.

Bjorn

>> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 2:31 AM,  <bugzilla-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > wrote:
>> >> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60555
>> >>
>> >>             Bug ID: 60555
>> >>            Summary: Some amount of ifconfig cause load average increase
>> >>                     and system freeze
>> >>            Product: Drivers
>> >>            Version: 2.5
>> >>     Kernel Version: 3.10.0
>> >>           Hardware: All
>> >>                 OS: Linux
>> >>               Tree: Mainline
>> >>             Status: NEW
>> >>           Severity: normal
>> >>           Priority: P1
>> >>          Component: PCI
>> >>           Assignee: drivers_pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >>           Reporter: onorua@xxxxxxxxx
>> >>         Regression: No
>> >>
>> >> I've faced with the situation when system stopped to process any
>> >> request.
>> >> Further analysis showed that the load average was around 20, and was
>> >> constantly
>> >> increasing (the normal LA for this system is 0.3-1).
>> >
>> > Thanks for the report; sorry it fell through the cracks.
>> >
>> > Is this problem reproducible?  If so, can you try to reproduce it on
>> > v3.11?  Can you please attach a complete dmesg log and "lspci -vv" (as
>> > root) output to the bugzilla?
>> >
>> > The BUG_ON you're hitting is here, but I don't know what it means:
>> >
>> >     #ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_HARDIRQS
>> >                 for (i = 0; i < nvec; i++)
>> >                         BUG_ON(irq_has_action(entry->irq + i));
>> >     #endif
>>
>> What's the status of this?  Is it still a problem?  Should we just
>> close the bug as unreproducible?
>>
>> Bjorn
>
>
--
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/