> ...Added Brian Vowell.
>
> On Fri, 6 Jun 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 03:44:32 +0200 "Oliver Pinter" <oliver.pntr@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Add Ingon and netdev to CC
>> >
>> >
>> > On 6/6/08, Zsiros Attila <zsirmo@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > Hy!
>> > >
>> > > I have a problem.
>> > >
>> > >
http://www.cyberszeg.hu/log/kern.log
>> > >
http://www.cyberszeg.hu/log/config-2.6.25.4
>> > >
http://www.cyberszeg.hu/log/lspci.txt
>> > >
http://www.cyberszeg.hu/log/ifconfig.txt
>> > >
>>
>> : Jun 6 14:03:07 www kernel: [ 5897.660390] NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0:
>> transmit timed out
>> : Jun 6 14:03:07 www kernel: [ 5897.660398] tg3: eth0: transmit timed
>> out, resetting
>> : Jun 6 14:03:07 www kernel: [ 5897.660432] tg3: DEBUG:
>> MAC_TX_STATUS[0000001e] MAC_RX_STATUS[0000000e]
>> : Jun 6 14:03:07 www kernel: [ 5897.660454] tg3: DEBUG:
>> RDMAC_STATUS[00000000] WDMAC_STATUS[00000000]
>> : Jun 6 14:03:07 www kernel: [ 5897.762983] tg3: tg3_stop_block timed
>> out, ofs=1800 enable_bit=2
>> : Jun 6 14:03:07 www kernel: [ 5897.864168] tg3: tg3_stop_block timed
>> out, ofs=c00 enable_bit=2
>> : Jun 6 14:03:07 www kernel: [ 5897.965619] tg3: tg3_stop_block timed
>> out, ofs=4800 enable_bit=2
>>
>> That looks like a driver failure.
>>
>> : Jun 6 14:03:07 www kernel: [ 5898.096689] tg3: eth0: Link is down.
>> : Jun 6 14:03:11 www kernel: [ 5901.633931] tg3: eth0: Link is up at 1000
>> Mbps, full duplex.
>> : Jun 6 14:03:11 www kernel: [ 5901.633937] tg3: eth0: Flow control is on
>> for TX and on for RX.
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556309] clamscan: page allocation
>> failure. order:3, mode:0x4020
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556319] Pid: 24139, comm: clamscan
>> Not tainted 2.6.25.4 #1
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556325]
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556326] Call Trace:
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556329] <IRQ>
>> [__alloc_pages+544/890] __alloc_pages+0x220/0x37a
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556353] [tcp_v4_do_rcv+186/504]
>> tcp_v4_do_rcv+0xba/0x1f8
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556359] [ktime_get+12/98]
>> ktime_get+0xc/0x62
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556364] [__netdev_alloc_skb+23/49]
>> __netdev_alloc_skb+0x17/0x31
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556370] [__slab_alloc+330/1403]
>> __slab_alloc+0x14a/0x57b
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556374] [__netdev_alloc_skb+23/49]
>> __netdev_alloc_skb+0x17/0x31
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556379] [__netdev_alloc_skb+23/49]
>> __netdev_alloc_skb+0x17/0x31
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556384]
>> [__kmalloc_track_caller+185/190] __kmalloc_track_caller+0xb9/0xbe
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556391] [__alloc_skb+86/305]
>> __alloc_skb+0x56/0x131
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556395] [__netdev_alloc_skb+23/49]
>> __netdev_alloc_skb+0x17/0x31
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556408] [_end+128472975/2130444940]
>> :tg3:tg3_alloc_rx_skb+0x8f/0x17e
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556418] [_end+128493403/2130444940]
>> :tg3:tg3_poll+0x6e8/0x922
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556426] [net_rx_action+134/309]
>> net_rx_action+0x86/0x135
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556433] [__do_softirq+102/212]
>> __do_softirq+0x66/0xd4
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556439] [call_softirq+28/48]
>> call_softirq+0x1c/0x30
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556444] [do_softirq+48/107]
>> do_softirq+0x30/0x6b
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556448] [do_IRQ+114/212]
>> do_IRQ+0x72/0xd4
>> : Jun 6 14:04:11 www kernel: [ 6464.556453] [ret_from_intr+0/10]
>> ret_from_intr+0x0/0xa
>>
>> The driver is trying to do a 32 kbyte GFP_ATOMIC memory allocation.
>> rofl, good luck with that.
>>
>> But the netwoking code sould survive this.
>>
>> <12 billion more page allocation failures>
>>
>> Are you using jumbo frames or have you manually set the MTU to
>> something enormous? Because 32k is a pretty crazy amount of memory for
>> the driver to be trying to allocate - it's going to fail all over the
>> place, as you have discovered.
>
> Same allocation failed problem (among an TCP issue that is nowadays
> fixed) was also reported by Brian Vowell:
>
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10767
>
>
> --
> i.
>
