Comment 27 Alexander Duyck Comment 14 Andy Gospodarek Comment 54 Don Zickus We’ve also never heard anything about it before, so that makes me wonder what really causes this. Comment 41 Takeshi Suzuki Comment 11 Takeshi Suzuki The only issue addressed in the patch is that the wrong semaphore was being used when attempting to determine the phy id.
|Date Added:||20 April 2006|
|File Size:||50.58 Mb|
|Operating Systems:||Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug. Comment 28 Takeshi Suzuki It was frequent with th EL5.
redhaf There is a good chance what is occuring is a fifo corruption and no packets being received as a result. Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug. Receive Interrupt Delay array of int parm: If this is a production issue, please report it to your Red Hat Support contact. I’ve not seen this on any of the dual-port igb cards I’ve used in the past, so I figured this was something that was specific to the load.
I’d like to test this a bit more and target this for the next update in the event this introduces a regression we don’t expect and this is no worse than what we shipped in 5.
Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5. Sounds like it to me. Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.
However feel free to provide a comment indicating that this fix has been verified. Interrupt Throttling Rate array of int parm: Comment 3 Prarit Bhargava I’m being particular about this ugb it’s quite difficult to get things into 5.
Those calls were originally left in place not removed like they were upstream because we don’t have the same capability to prevent polling in RHEL5 that we do upstream, so I’m curious rechat this is something that can be resolved with a different layout of calls that are igb-driver specific.
Comment 5 Larry Troan Problem 4 from comment 18 is also strange because here we ogb a fully loaded igb driver and we are just doing renegotiations.
Bug – igb module leaves PCI Network Interface in ‘UNCLAIMED’ state
Have you discussed that with Ibg Ronciak? The argument from Suzuki-san makes sense to me. Comment 29 Takeshi Suzuki Comment 23 Takeshi Suzuki That also doesn’t fit very well with the explanation in comment Comment 17 Takeshi Suzuki If I read this correctly, this race is unlikely when there is minimal traffic on the network while the system is booting, but in cases where there is a large amount of traffic coming into both interfaces while booting, right?
So although all changes to Enterprise Linux go through Bugzilla and Red Hat considers issues directly entered into Bugzilla valuable feedback, there is no SLA around it.
[vfio-users] The same IOMMU group for igb and its igbvf siblings
We’ve also never heard anything about it before, so that makes me wonder what really causes this. This is what our lab tests suggest, at least. In fact, we confirmed the problem can be workaround in both cases, i. Enable PHY smart power down array of int parm: Maximum number of virtual functions to allocate per physical function uint Comment 3 Prarit Bhargava refhat Comment 41 Takeshi Suzuki