Bug 436841 - NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out (network card doesn't work)
NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out (network card doesn't work)
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: kernel (Show other bugs)
9
All Linux
low Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Kernel Maintainer List
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2008-03-10 15:02 EDT by JM
Modified: 2009-07-14 11:42 EDT (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2009-07-14 11:42:36 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description JM 2008-03-10 15:02:25 EDT
With the new kernel (kernel-2.6.24.3-12.fc8) I can't use my network card
anymore, I get the message:

NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out

with the old kernel (kernel-2.6.23.15-137.fc8) it works without any problems (I
switched betweens the kernels after a reboot).

I tried some kernel options like noacpi, noapic and a few others but nothings
changed the result, the network card doesn't work, so I replaced the card with
another card (different chipset) and the "new" card works with the new kernel.

This is the the card which _doesn't work_ with kernel-2.6.24.3-12.fc8 (kernel
module is 'r8169'):

00:0b.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL-8169 Gigabit
Ethernet (rev 10)

and this is the card which works (kernel module 'tulip'):

00:07.0 Ethernet controller: Lite-On Communications Inc LNE100TX (rev 20).

I found this old kernel bug http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6138 but
I don't know if the bug is related to this problem.
Comment 1 JM 2008-06-06 16:55:58 EDT
Same problem with Fedora 9 and kernel-2.6.25.3-18.fc9.
Comment 2 Josep 2008-09-21 18:33:32 EDT
Can you see if this is a duplicate of Bug #444966?
Try for instance "rmmod r8169; modprobe r8169" and see if this brings the network up.
Comment 3 Chuck Ebbert 2008-09-22 13:01:04 EDT
Is this fixed in 2.6.26.3-29?
Comment 4 Michal Jaegermann 2008-10-22 14:56:47 EDT
I see one with 2.6.26.5-28.fc8 on x86_64 (although only as a warning and this time it recovered):

Call Trace:
 <IRQ>  [<ffffffff810364d8>] warn_on_slowpath+0x60/0x8e
 [<ffffffff8103f8a0>] ? __mod_timer+0xc1/0xd3
 [<ffffffff8104647f>] ? queue_delayed_work_on+0xc3/0xd6
 [<ffffffff8122ad02>] ? dev_watchdog+0x0/0x116
 [<ffffffff810464ce>] ? queue_delayed_work+0x21/0x23
 [<ffffffff810464e9>] ? schedule_delayed_work+0x19/0x1b
 [<ffffffffa00e20d2>] ? :r8169:rtl8169_schedule_work+0x23/0x25
 [<ffffffff8122adb8>] dev_watchdog+0xb6/0x116
 [<ffffffff8103f16b>] run_timer_softirq+0x173/0x1ef
 [<ffffffff8103b2ab>] __do_softirq+0x5e/0xd5
 [<ffffffff8100d4fc>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x28
 [<ffffffff8100ed0e>] do_softirq+0x44/0x8b
 [<ffffffff8103b20c>] irq_exit+0x3f/0x80
 [<ffffffff8101b09e>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x8d/0xa6
 [<ffffffff8100b1a6>] ? default_idle+0x0/0x4e
 [<ffffffff8100cf22>] apic_timer_interrupt+0x72/0x80
 <EOI>  [<ffffffff81020488>] ? native_safe_halt+0x6/0x8
 [<ffffffff8129adcf>] ? atomic_notifier_call_chain+0xf/0x11
 [<ffffffff8100b1d4>] ? default_idle+0x2e/0x4e
 [<ffffffff8100ad46>] ? cpu_idle+0x91/0xbb
 [<ffffffff81292873>] ? start_secondary+0x168/0x16c

---[ end trace 55e53d9768d67aa3 ]---

"rmmod r8169; modprobe r8169" is not an option as this machine is remote for me and last night it just dropped from the network, without any leftover traces in logs, until somebody rebooted it today.
Comment 5 JM 2008-11-24 11:24:40 EST
I tried it today with the kernel 2.6.27.5-41.fc9.x86_64 and the problem still exists but when I do a "rmmod r8169; modprobe r8169" the network comes up... of course this is not a solution but at least it's different behaviour than before :-)... so I guess the bug could be related to the Bug #444966...
Comment 6 Bug Zapper 2009-06-09 19:43:09 EDT
This message is a reminder that Fedora 9 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 9.  It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained.  At that time
this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 
'version' of '9'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 9's end of life.

Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that 
we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 9 is end of life.  If you 
would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it 
against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this 
bug to the applicable version.  If you are unable to change the version, 
please add a comment here and someone will do it for you.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events.  Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

The process we are following is described here: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Comment 7 Bug Zapper 2009-07-14 11:42:36 EDT
Fedora 9 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-07-10. Fedora 9 is 
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further 
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of 
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.