Bug#573007: NIC r8169 doesn t start at restart on kernel linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-686 (workaround)
- To: 573007@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Bug#573007: NIC r8169 doesn t start at restart on kernel linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-686 (workaround)
- From: Florent Rougon <f.rougon@free.fr>
- Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 12:14:10 +0200
- Message-id: <877ho2ph1p.fsf@zita.maison>
- Reply-to: Florent Rougon <f.rougon@free.fr>, 573007@bugs.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <1269803768.8653.169.camel@localhost>
- References: <87d3yo9ziv.fsf@zita.maison> <1269795046.8653.166.camel@localhost> <87wrww8jg6.fsf@zita.maison> <1269803768.8653.169.camel@localhost> <878w9a6a6w.fsf@zita.maison>
Hi,
I applied this patch
(http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=573007#54) on March
29[1], but unfortunately, the bug is still there for me. More precisely,
my script which detects and works around the problem triggered at the
following times since then:
Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:11:18 +0200 Attempt to reinitialize Ethernet interfaces
Thu, 08 Apr 2010 10:21:39 +0200 Attempt to reinitialize Ethernet interfaces
Wed, 14 Apr 2010 10:42:20 +0200 Attempt to reinitialize Ethernet interfaces
Thu, 15 Apr 2010 10:27:03 +0200 Attempt to reinitialize Ethernet interfaces
(sorry, I was too busy to report before)
I just modified it so that it also logs the HW address of the Ethernet
interface that was detected as failed, and will report next time I have
a failure, to make sure we are really talking about the same bug (I also
noticed #516187...).
Thanks.
[1] As I wrote to Ben Hutchings in private, I applied the patch on the
source tree obtained from linux-source-2.6.32_2.6.32-10_all.deb
and compiled with the standard kernel configuration options from
linux-image-2.6.32-4-amd64_2.6.32-10_amd64.deb (/boot/config-...)
I also investigated the following boot messages:
[ 1.449790] r8169 0000:02:00.0: firmware: requesting rtl8168d-2.fw
[ 1.529423] eth0: unable to apply firmware patch
[ 2.338209] r8169 0000:03:00.0: firmware: requesting rtl8168d-2.fw
[ 2.339586] eth1: unable to apply firmware patch
but found no place to download the firmware file from, despite
several people complaining about that and not finding the
aforementioned file either. Apparently, the firmware file is not
needed, or only for some model(s) if used in this or that way, but
the message is always printed, no matter what.
--
Florent
Reply to: