Darren
I will buy a hub and test.
Thanks
Christian
Darren
I have a Sagemcom modem with gigagabit ethernet ports, so the '100M' is not a valid explanation for this issue. Tested also with an A-Link WNAP router - no difference.daz wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 8:18 pm I used to have this when I first got my X5000. I'm told it's due to the ports your X5000 is connected to, apparently some 100Mbit ports don't fully comply and upset the DPAA. I use a 5 port hub now, and that doesn't cause problems. Do you have a different router you could try? Or can you connect through a Hub device first?
Many thanks for testing the final kernel 5.7!
Thanks a lot for testing!
Code: Select all
This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
powerpc/64s: Fix KVM interrupt using wrong save area
to the 5.7-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
powerpc-64s-fix-kvm-interrupt-using-wrong-save-area.patch
and it can be found in the queue-5.7 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.
>From 0bdcfa182506526fbe4e088ff9ca86a31b81828d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 16:12:47 +1000
Subject: powerpc/64s: Fix KVM interrupt using wrong save area
From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
commit 0bdcfa182506526fbe4e088ff9ca86a31b81828d upstream.
The CTR register reload in the KVM interrupt path used the wrong save
area for SLB (and NMI) interrupts.
Fixes: 9600f261acaa ("powerpc/64s/exception: Move KVM test to common code")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.7+
Reported-by: Christian Zigotzky <chzigotzky@xenosoft.de>
Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Christian Zigotzky <chzigotzky@xenosoft.de>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200615061247.1310763-1-npiggin@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S
@@ -270,7 +270,7 @@ BEGIN_FTR_SECTION
END_FTR_SECTION_IFSET(CPU_FTR_CFAR)
.endif
- ld r10,PACA_EXGEN+EX_CTR(r13)
+ ld r10,IAREA+EX_CTR(r13)
mtctr r10
BEGIN_FTR_SECTION
ld r10,IAREA+EX_PPR(r13)
@@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ END_FTR_SECTION_IFSET(CPU_FTR_HAS_PPR)
.if IKVM_SKIP
89: mtocrf 0x80,r9
- ld r10,PACA_EXGEN+EX_CTR(r13)
+ ld r10,IAREA+EX_CTR(r13)
mtctr r10
ld r9,IAREA+EX_R9(r13)
ld r10,IAREA+EX_R10(r13)
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from npiggin@gmail.com are
queue-5.7/powerpc-64s-kuap-add-missing-isync-to-kuap-restore-p.patch
queue-5.7/powerpc-64s-exceptions-machine-check-reconcile-irq-s.patch
queue-5.7/powerpc-64s-fix-kvm-interrupt-using-wrong-save-area.patch
queue-5.7/powerpc-book3s64-radix-tlb-determine-hugepage-flush-.patch
queue-5.7/powerpc-64s-exception-fix-machine-check-no-loss-idle.patch
queue-5.7/powerpc-pseries-ras-fix-fwnmi_valid-off-by-one.patch
Christian, did you already get and test a hub...? Did that solve the problem?
No, I haven’t test it with a hub yet.