On 04.12.2017 23:10, rwarsow@gmx.de wrote:
Hallo
someone and I got an regression with e1000e since kernel 4.14.3 and it seems there is 4.14.4 on the way without a fix.
bug report is here:
( added stable and netdev to CC )
Yes I have a box with e1000e and it seems something at least breaks NM after 4.14.3.
Interesting here , when using connman the connection is stable.
Regards,
Gabriel C
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 12:47:10AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote:
On 04.12.2017 23:10, rwarsow@gmx.de wrote:
Hallo
someone and I got an regression with e1000e since kernel 4.14.3 and it seems there is 4.14.4 on the way without a fix.
bug report is here:
( added stable and netdev to CC )
Yes I have a box with e1000e and it seems something at least breaks NM after 4.14.3.
Again, can people try 4.14.5-rc1? It should be resolved there.
thanks,
greg k-h
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 07:18:34AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 12:47:10AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote:
On 04.12.2017 23:10, rwarsow@gmx.de wrote:
Hallo
someone and I got an regression with e1000e since kernel 4.14.3 and it seems there is 4.14.4 on the way without a fix.
bug report is here:
( added stable and netdev to CC )
Yes I have a box with e1000e and it seems something at least breaks NM after 4.14.3.
Again, can people try 4.14.5-rc1? It should be resolved there.
Oops, that would be 4.14.4-rc1. Any why do you say above that is on the way without a fix, did you test it?
thanks,
greg k-h
On 05.12.2017 07:19, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 07:18:34AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 12:47:10AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote:
On 04.12.2017 23:10, rwarsow@gmx.de wrote:
Hallo
someone and I got an regression with e1000e since kernel 4.14.3 and it seems there is 4.14.4 on the way without a fix.
bug report is here:
( added stable and netdev to CC )
Yes I have a box with e1000e and it seems something at least breaks NM after 4.14.3.
Again, can people try 4.14.5-rc1? It should be resolved there.
Oops, that would be 4.14.4-rc1. Any why do you say above that is on the way without a fix, did you test it?
I didn't tested 4.14.4-rc1 but somone from the bug report tested it and told is not resolved.
I'll fire up an build in a bit and let you know.
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 09:20:33AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote:
On 05.12.2017 07:19, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 07:18:34AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 12:47:10AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote:
On 04.12.2017 23:10, rwarsow@gmx.de wrote:
Hallo
someone and I got an regression with e1000e since kernel 4.14.3 and it seems there is 4.14.4 on the way without a fix.
bug report is here:
( added stable and netdev to CC )
Yes I have a box with e1000e and it seems something at least breaks NM after 4.14.3.
Again, can people try 4.14.5-rc1? It should be resolved there.
Oops, that would be 4.14.4-rc1. Any why do you say above that is on the way without a fix, did you test it?
I didn't tested 4.14.4-rc1 but somone from the bug report tested it and told is not resolved.
I'll fire up an build in a bit and let you know.
Great, and maybe cc: the developers and mailing list for this driver at the same time? :)
On 05.12.2017 09:53, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 09:20:33AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote:
On 05.12.2017 07:19, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 07:18:34AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 12:47:10AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote:
On 04.12.2017 23:10, rwarsow@gmx.de wrote:
Hallo
someone and I got an regression with e1000e since kernel 4.14.3 and it seems there is 4.14.4 on the way without a fix.
bug report is here:
( added stable and netdev to CC )
Yes I have a box with e1000e and it seems something at least breaks NM after 4.14.3.
Again, can people try 4.14.5-rc1? It should be resolved there.
Oops, that would be 4.14.4-rc1. Any why do you say above that is on the way without a fix, did you test it?
I didn't tested 4.14.4-rc1 but somone from the bug report tested it and told is not resolved.
I'll fire up an build in a bit and let you know.
Great, and maybe cc: the developers and mailing list for this driver at the same time? :)
Greg,
last time I reported something about e100* someone told me to just CC netdev =)
However the issue still remains with 4.14.4-rc1 and NM , and is still fine with connman.
I don't even think is something about the driver itself because I've quick compiled the out-of-tree-e1000e and breaks with NM in the same way. ( which should not be possible ? )
Even when 4.14.3 was biggiSH :) after a quick scan and assuming the e1000e patches are fine , remaining candidates should be the IRQ* and x86/* ones ?
NM seems to go in a loop setup link , kill link , setup link etc like this :
Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.5925] policy: auto-activating connection 'enp6s0_1' Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.5940] device (enp6s0): Activation: starting connection 'enp6s0_1' (8a825b19-b086-3413-901c-508ee26b4138) Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.5943] device (enp6s0): state change: disconnected -> prepare (reason 'none', sys-iface-state: 'managed') Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.5945] manager: NetworkManager state is now CONNECTING Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.5950] device (enp6s0): state change: prepare -> config (reason 'none', sys-iface-state: 'managed') Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.5958] device (enp6s0): state change: config -> ip-config (reason 'none', sys-iface-state: 'managed') Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.5962] dhcp4 (enp6s0): activation: beginning transaction (timeout in 45 seconds) Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.5980] dhcp4 (enp6s0): dhclient started with pid 1180 Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg dhclient[1180]: DHCPREQUEST on enp6s0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg dhclient[1180]: DHCPACK from 192.168.178.1 Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.6268] dhcp4 (enp6s0): address 192.168.178.21 Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.6268] dhcp4 (enp6s0): plen 24 (255.255.255.0) Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.6269] dhcp4 (enp6s0): gateway 192.168.178.1 Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.6269] dhcp4 (enp6s0): lease time 864000 Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.6269] dhcp4 (enp6s0): nameserver '192.168.178.1' Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.6270] dhcp4 (enp6s0): domain name 'fritz.box' Dez 05 09:51:45 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463905.6270] dhcp4 (enp6s0): state changed unknown -> bound
and then :
Dez 05 09:52:17 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463937.5788] device (enp6s0): state change: ip-config -> failed (reason 'ip-config-unavailable', sys-iface-state: 'managed') Dez 05 09:52:17 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463937.5792] manager: NetworkManager state is now DISCONNECTED Dez 05 09:52:17 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463937.5794] policy: disabling autoconnect for connection 'enp6s0_1'. Dez 05 09:52:17 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <warn> [1512463937.5798] device (enp6s0): Activation: failed for connection 'enp6s0_1' Dez 05 09:52:17 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463937.5807] device (enp6s0): state change: failed -> disconnected (reason 'none', sys-iface-state: 'managed') Dez 05 09:52:17 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463937.5899] dhcp4 (enp6s0): canceled DHCP transaction, DHCP client pid 1180 Dez 05 09:52:17 zwerg NetworkManager[807]: <info> [1512463937.5899] dhcp4 (enp6s0): state changed bound -> done
...
With connman all is fine and the connection is stable so the driver itself seems fine..
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:16:03AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote:
On 05.12.2017 09:53, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 09:20:33AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote:
On 05.12.2017 07:19, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 07:18:34AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 12:47:10AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote:
On 04.12.2017 23:10, rwarsow@gmx.de wrote:
> Hallo > > someone and I got an regression with e1000e since kernel 4.14.3 and it seems there is 4.14.4 on the way without a fix. > > > bug report is here: > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198047
( added stable and netdev to CC )
Yes I have a box with e1000e and it seems something at least breaks NM after 4.14.3.
Again, can people try 4.14.5-rc1? It should be resolved there.
Oops, that would be 4.14.4-rc1. Any why do you say above that is on the way without a fix, did you test it?
I didn't tested 4.14.4-rc1 but somone from the bug report tested it and told is not resolved.
I'll fire up an build in a bit and let you know.
Great, and maybe cc: the developers and mailing list for this driver at the same time? :)
Greg,
last time I reported something about e100* someone told me to just CC netdev =)
However the issue still remains with 4.14.4-rc1 and NM , and is still fine with connman.
I don't even think is something about the driver itself because I've quick compiled the out-of-tree-e1000e and breaks with NM in the same way. ( which should not be possible ? )
Even when 4.14.3 was biggiSH :) after a quick scan and assuming the e1000e patches are fine , remaining candidates should be the IRQ* and x86/* ones ?
I am not assuming the e1000e patches are all fine :)
Any chance you can do a 'git bisect' between 4.14.2 and 4.14.3 to find the offending patch?
thanks,
greg k-h
On 05.12.2017 10:23, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:16:03AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote:
On 05.12.2017 09:53, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 09:20:33AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote:
On 05.12.2017 07:19, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 07:18:34AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 12:47:10AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote: > On 04.12.2017 23:10, rwarsow@gmx.de wrote: > >> Hallo >> >> someone and I got an regression with e1000e since kernel 4.14.3 and it seems there is 4.14.4 on the way without a fix. >> >> >> bug report is here: >> >> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198047 > > ( added stable and netdev to CC ) > > Yes I have a box with e1000e and it seems something at least breaks NM after 4.14.3.
Again, can people try 4.14.5-rc1? It should be resolved there.
Oops, that would be 4.14.4-rc1. Any why do you say above that is on the way without a fix, did you test it?
I didn't tested 4.14.4-rc1 but somone from the bug report tested it and told is not resolved.
I'll fire up an build in a bit and let you know.
Great, and maybe cc: the developers and mailing list for this driver at the same time? :)
Greg,
last time I reported something about e100* someone told me to just CC netdev =)
However the issue still remains with 4.14.4-rc1 and NM , and is still fine with connman.
I don't even think is something about the driver itself because I've quick compiled the out-of-tree-e1000e and breaks with NM in the same way. ( which should not be possible ? )
Even when 4.14.3 was biggiSH :) after a quick scan and assuming the e1000e patches are fine , remaining candidates should be the IRQ* and x86/* ones ?
I am not assuming the e1000e patches are all fine :)
Any chance you can do a 'git bisect' between 4.14.2 and 4.14.3 to find the offending patch?
I can but I'm not sure I can do that today , the box is my working box and can't take it down right now.
Maybe I can do that tonight depending on how tired I am :)
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Gabriel C -
Greg KH