Bugtraq mailing list archives
Re: Flaw in 3c59x.c or in Kernel?
From: dwmalone () MATHS TCD IE (David Malone)
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 10:42:53 +0000
On Tue, Jan 04, 2000 at 09:21:36AM -0500, Sonny Parlin wrote:
eth1: Too much work in interrupt, status e481. Temporarily disabling functions(7b7e).
We saw this with some Linux machines in college that were connected to busy 100Mb/s ethernet. Bill Paul is right when he says ifconfiging down and then up fixes the hang. To work around the problem we changed max_interrupt_work from 20 to 200 and I don't think they've seen any hangs since. (You can find this in the .c file for the driver). These machines were also seeing hard lockups - keyboard stopped responding. This seemed to stop too when we upped this variable. David.
Current thread:
- Flaw in 3c59x.c or in Kernel? Sonny Parlin (Jan 04)
- Re: Flaw in 3c59x.c or in Kernel? Raymond Dijkxhoorn (Jan 04)
- Re: Flaw in 3c59x.c or in Kernel? Bill Paul (Jan 04)
- Re: Flaw in 3c59x.c or in Kernel? danny (Jan 04)
- userhelper/PAM exploit Derek Callaway (Jan 04)
- Re: Flaw in 3c59x.c or in Kernel? Raymond Dijkxhoorn (Jan 05)
- Re: Flaw in 3c59x.c or in Kernel? David Malone (Jan 05)
- Re: Flaw in 3c59x.c or in Kernel? Sonny Parlin (Jan 05)
- Re: Flaw in 3c59x.c or in Kernel? Jonathan Poole (Jan 05)
- Re: Flaw in 3c59x.c or in Kernel? Pug Bainter (Jan 05)
- Re: Flaw in 3c59x.c or in Kernel? Sonny Parlin (Jan 05)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- FW: Flaw in 3c59x.c or in Kernel? William R. Lorenz (Jan 05)