Bug 116617
Summary: | (NET TG3) "ethtool ethX" dies with SEGV on IBM Bladecenter HS20 blades | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 | Reporter: | John Caruso <jcaruso> |
Component: | ethtool | Assignee: | Jeff Garzik <jgarzik> |
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 2.1 | CC: | brian, davem, peterm |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2012-06-20 13:20:18 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
John Caruso
2004-02-23 20:24:49 UTC
Sorry, typo in the "ethtool -s etho speed 1000 duplex full autoneg off " command (it should have said eth0, not etho). In any case, it works without a problem. So... this is not actually a bug, then? If I'm interpreting your comment incorrectly, please reopen. The intention of my second note was solely to correct a typo. When I said "it works without a problem", I meant that the command "ethtool - s eth0 speed 1000 duplex full autoneg off" works without a problem (whereas obviously putting etho instead of eth0 wouldn't have). Yes, it is most definitely a live bug, reproducible every single time. And to preempt any further confusion: when I said "it is most definitely a live bug" in the above note, I meant that the original bug report still obtains: that if you do "ethtool ethX" for any interface on an IBM HS20 blade, it will print the information and then die with a segmentation fault. Is there any progress on this bug? Do you need any more info from me? It's certainly easy to reproduce. I'm starting to think that this bug report was "tainted" by being prematurely closed, and so I should just close it and open a new one (since this one seems to have been orphaned). If not, let me know. It should indeed be closed, as it should be fixed in the latest update. If it is not, please do open a new bug. It should not have been closed on 2/24/2004, regardless of what's been done about it since. If it's actually fixed now, please clarify which level of the ethtool RPM fixes the problem. Thanks. Thank you for submitting this issue for consideration in Red Hat Enterprise Linux. The release for which you requested us to review is now End of Life. Please See https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/ If you would like Red Hat to re-consider your feature request for an active release, please re-open the request via appropriate support channels and provide additional supporting details about the importance of this issue. |