[Click] tx timeout fix

[Jason Park]

Dear click guys.

I hacked the click for TX timeout and found something.
For now lib/packet.cc expensive_uniqueify() function does not initialize all
of skb_shinfo about tcp segment offloading.
As a result, It made TSO supported e1000 device to TX timeout.
(hw.mac_type >= e1000_82544 && hw.mac_type != 82547)
I think it caused a confusing for click users about stability of click on
e1000.
Here I attached patch. If someone test, please let me know your test result.
(It should work with skb_clone() not replaced skb_copy())

Thanks in advance.

Jason.
-----Original Message-----
From: adam.greenhalgh at gmail.com [mailto:adam.greenhalgh at gmail.com] On Behalf
Of Adam Greenhalgh
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 5:12 PM
To: Jason Park
Cc: todd lewis; click at pdos.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [Click] tx timeout fix

Another thing that would be useful to know is what chipset the e1000
that has problems is using since it is almost a weekly occurance that
a TX hang for one card or another gets reported to the netdev and
e1000 lists. From these lists it would seem that many of the hangs
have been fixed by the folks at intel, a new release of the 7 series
driver is occuring soon, so perhaps it is time to upgrade the click
driver.

Adam

On 9/6/06, Jason Park <jason at geninetworks.com> wrote:
> AS NOTED BEFORE, I suggest him to turn off packet split function not
> skb_copy.
> skb_copy is my environment and I mentioned it as referencing.
>
> Jason.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: todd lewis [mailto:tgl2 at yahoo.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 12:37 AM
> To: Jason Park; 'Srivas Chennu'
> Cc: click at pdos.csail.mit.edu
> Subject: Re: [Click] tx timeout fix
>
> As noted before, replacing skb_clone with skb_copy amounts to fixing a
> broken door by burning the
> house down.
>
> Does anyone have success under real bidirectional load without copying
every
> packet?  If so, with
> what configuration?
>
> --- Jason Park <jason at geninetworks.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Srivas
> >
> > What e1000 device are you using?
> > If your device support PACKET_SPLIT and you turned on, you should turn
off
> > it.
> > Make sure un-define CONFIG_E1000_PACKET_SPLIT on 6.1.16.62.DB driver.
> > It works well for me with disable packet split and replacing skb_clone
to
> > skb_copy.
> >
> > Jason
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: click-bounces at pdos.csail.mit.edu
> > [mailto:click-bounces at pdos.csail.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Srivas Chennu
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 5:37 PM
> > To: Click
> > Subject: Re: [Click] tx timeout fix
> >
> > Hello Adam and Beyers,
> >
> > I've been lately testing the timeout fixes you had posted on a
> > click-patched 2.6.16.13 kernel. The results therefrom still seem to show
> > stability problems. Though the timeouts don't occur predictably or as
> > often as before, I still encounter them and kernel panics randomly, and
> > with a higher probability when testing with high loads. Notably, I see
> > these problems well pronounced with bidirectional (full-duplex)
> > operation of the driver, both with FromDevice and PollDevice. I've
> > tested the 5.x driver patch as well as the 6.1.16.62.DB version patch,
> > and seen similar results.
> >
> > Please do let me know of the details of a stable 2.6.x configuration
> > that you were able to set up using these patches. Further, any idea if
> > and when the fixes will eventually get in to the main source tree of the
> > e1000 driver on sourceforge?
> >
> > Thanks a bunch in advance,
> > Srivas.
> >
> > On Jul 26, 2006 09:06 PM, Adam Greenhalgh wrote:
> >
> > >hi
> > >
> > >beyers and i have been hacking and we have fixed the tx timeout bug.
> > >basically the time_stamp is not being set in the buffer and when linux
> > >sends packets too, it encounters a buffer with a time stamp of 0 and
> > >throws an erorr. Attached are two patches, one against cvs ,
> > >driver-5.x-e1000_main.patch , and one against Max's 6.1.16.2.DB
> > >driver, driver-6.1.16.2.DB-e1000_main.patch . Neither patch has been
> > >very heavily tested yet, but neither does anything special.
> > >
> > >enjoy
> > >
> > >adam
> >
> > --
> > Visit us at
> > IFA  Berlin, 01.-06. September 2006
> > and
> > IBC Amsterdam, NL, 08.-12.September 2006
> > _______________________________________________
> > click mailing list
> > click at amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu
> > https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > click mailing list
> > click at amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu
> > https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> click mailing list
> click at amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu
> https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: packet.cc.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 607 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/pipermail/click/attachments/20060915/e4e836f5/packet.cc.obj