| Summary: | e1000 startup delays complicates net init process, especially for newer/advanced net scripts in latest baselayout | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Matthew Marlowe (RETIRED) <mattm> |
| Component: | [OLD] baselayout | Assignee: | Gentoo Kernel Bug Wranglers and Kernel Maintainers <kernel> |
| Status: | RESOLVED NEEDINFO | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | mattm, uberlord |
| Priority: | Low | ||
| Version: | 2005.0 | ||
| Hardware: | AMD64 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Bug Depends on: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 109803 | ||
|
Description
Matthew Marlowe (RETIRED)
2005-05-31 13:51:35 UTC
and have you tried tweaking RC_NET_STRICT_CHECKING in /etc/conf.d/rc ? Are you depending the bonds correctly?
/etc/conf.d/net sample
depend_bond0() {
need net.eth0 net.eth1
}
depend_bond1() {
need net.eth2 net.eth3
}
depend_bond2() {
need net.eth4 net.eth5
}
Closing as WORKSFORME problem still exists. Discussed bug tonight on gentoo-server irc channel. Consensus seems to be that a bug does exist. And, I believe Dell sent out a notice about 1 year ago saying that certain intel gigE nics would have long initialization times. strict net checking doesnt really help as the net startup script succeeds. The nics arent just setup yet. It takes a few seconds more. Bonding dependencies are correct. So would you say that the real problem is with the kernel driver then as it's returning too fast? You could do this do delay init.
preup() {
# Sleep 5 seconds before bringing up a bonded interface
[[ ${IFACE} == "bond"* ]] && sleep 5
}
But otherwise this sounds like a kernel bug.
another note: I have found that some switches, especially cisco, have a portfast option that allows ports to be manually designated as 'server only'. It skips the whole spanning tree loop checks and allows the link to go up real fast. Currently, I am having to enable this option on my switches to get around the e1000 bug. Usual procedure is to get this reported upstream. Is it reproducible on 2.6.15? Try a recent -git release of Linus' tree (e.g. git-sources). There have been many e1000 fixes committed over the last few days. Please reopen when you respond to comment #8 or #9. |