Re: e1000 driver bug?

On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 10:18:44PM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 11:53:54AM -0300, Ulisses Furquim wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I'm experiencing some problems when using etherboot's 5.4.0 e1000
> > driver together with grub 0.97. I made some changes in grub's code to
> > make pxegrub work with my e1000-82540em card.  I'm having problems
> > when grub tries to get an IP using DHCP. I enabled debug and I also
> > added some more printfs and could see the e1000_poll() function says
> > it has arrived a frame 346 bytes long (containing the DHCP OFFER reply
> > from my DHCP server), but ethereal tells me this frame has 342 bytes
> > only. Besides, that frame seems to be shifted, because the frame type
> > comes zeroed and doesn't match a frame type of an IP packet (0x0800).
> > What is even curious is that after some time retrying, a frame
> > containing exactly the same DHCP OFFER from my DHCP server is sent and
> > everything just works (e1000's driver still reports the length of this
> > frame is 346 bytes!!!). Does anyone have a clue?
> 
> I would like to known which DHCP server you are using.  (see below)
> 
> 
> 
> > Best,
> > 
> > -- Ulisses
> > 
> > PS: I'm sending the log of what ethereal captured and I can post my
> > patch for grub 0.97 if necessary, but it seems the bug is in e1000's
> > driver.
> 
> Things to next time better:
> 
> * Place (big) files on a (web/ftp) server and post the URL of it.
>  (realize that you are on a mailinglist )
> 
> * say which node is what ( (MAC)addresses of the systemSss in the capture,
>  used operating systems, used applications ( name & version of deamons) )
> 
> * tell what is going on the network. Example given:
>   * Frame   0: server 10.2.2.12 is booted
>   * Frame  10: client does first DHCP request and becomes 10.2.2.155
>   * Frame  19: TFTP started
>   * Frame 305: pxegrub doing DHCP, the point where attention is needed.
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers
> Geert Stappers
> Who thinks it is not e1000 driver bug

And seen meanwhile that your DHCP server was misbehaving?
Or should we worry about the e1000?


Cheers
Geert Stappers

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDEJwoOSINbgwa/7sRApgVAKClwkB6rDXEKJYWY+b7uKlODO9uXQCbBcKa
8On+j9agIAMyvdWW8KIaD8Y=
=eQil
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----