Activity log for bug #263555

Date Who What changed Old value New value Message
2008-09-01 09:03:46 Chris Jones bug added bug
2008-09-01 09:03:57 Chris Jones linux: importance Undecided Critical
2008-09-01 09:03:57 Chris Jones linux: statusexplanation
2008-09-05 17:31:35 Leann Ogasawara linux: status New Triaged
2008-09-05 17:31:35 Leann Ogasawara linux: assignee timg-tpi
2008-09-05 17:31:35 Leann Ogasawara linux: statusexplanation Hi Chris, Just an update here in case you missed chatter in #kernel on Sept 03, tim has already began investigating this issue.
2008-09-20 12:22:12 Jojo bug added subscriber swierq
2008-09-22 20:57:01 Chris Jones bug assigned to linux (Suse)
2008-09-22 20:57:12 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Unknown Incomplete
2008-09-22 20:57:46 Chris Jones bug assigned to linux
2008-09-22 21:07:23 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Unknown Confirmed
2008-09-22 22:27:04 Chris Jones bug assigned to linux (Fedora)
2008-09-22 22:28:06 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Unknown Confirmed
2008-09-22 23:22:46 Steve Langasek linux: statusexplanation Jorge brought this bug to my attention just now; this really needs to be fixed one way or another for beta, even if that would mean blacklisting e1000e altogether until this is resolved. Even with as little as I use the wired ethernet on my laptop, I wouldn't enjoy having to RMA it to fix it after a kernel bug. :/
2008-09-22 23:22:46 Steve Langasek linux: milestone ubuntu-8.10-beta
2008-09-23 14:26:20 anitamarialaila bug added subscriber anitamarialaila
2008-09-23 16:07:34 Chris Jones description The e1000e driver in 2.6.27 (not tested with 2.6.26, but it was absolutely fine with whatever driver was used by 2.6.24) seems to support writing to the LAN chip's firmware, and if it follows the behaviour of the OpenBSD driver[0] then the firmware is mapped as writable the entire time the driver is loaded. As has happened to my Thinkpad X300 and several other people[1][2], it seems that other kernel bugs which trash memory can end up spewing nonsense into the LAN firmware and thus rewriting it with something that isn't the code required to drive a LAN port. There is no simple recovery strategy from this, and Intel's downloadable tools (IABUTIL.EXE) will not repair it, and worse, they will destroy the firmware enough that the device will no longer enumerate on the PCI bus. Intel subsequently say that these tools are only for use with Desktop parts and the fact that they run at all on Laptop parts is a bug[3]. I am returning my laptop to Lenovo to have the motherboard replaced, and without a strategy to be able to repair the firmware myself, I am very much reluctant to test this any further when I get the machine back, as if I hit the bug again I will be once again left with broken hardware. [0] http://www.blahonga.org/~art/rant.html (search for "em0") [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg00360.html [2] http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11382 [3]http://www.mail-archive.com/e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg00398.html In some circumstances it appears possible for the 2.6.27-rc kernels to corrupt the NVRAM used by some Intel network parts to store data such as MAC addresses. This is limited to the new e1000e driver, and reports have only appeared from users of "82566 and 82567 based LAN parts (ich8 and ich9)" (to quote Intel). The reports seem to be isolated to laptops, but it is not clear if this is because desktop/server parts are not vulnerable, or if use cases simply increase the chances of laptop users being hit. Once this corruption has occurred, recovery may be possible via a BIOS update, but may well require replacement of the hardware. Use of Intel's IABUTIL.EXE is strongly discouraged, as it will worsen the problem to the point where the network part will no longer appear on the PCI bus. (this is a new description, the original one was based on too much guesswork. Below are the URLs originally referenced) http://www.blahonga.org/~art/rant.html (search for "em0") http://www.mail-archive.com/e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg00360.html http://www.mail-archive.com/e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg00398.html
2008-09-23 16:07:34 Chris Jones title [intrepid] 2.6.27 e1000e kernel places Intel gigE chipsets at risk [intrepid] 2.6.27 e1000e driver places Intel ICH8 and ICH9 gigE chipsets at risk
2008-09-23 16:55:30 Steve Dee bug added subscriber Josh Lee
2008-09-23 19:57:37 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Incomplete In Progress
2008-09-23 20:17:02 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Confirmed In Progress
2008-09-23 23:06:39 Chris Jones bug assigned to linux (Mandriva)
2008-09-23 23:08:12 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Unknown Confirmed
2008-09-24 01:20:06 Launchpad Janitor linux: status Triaged Fix Released
2008-09-24 10:12:34 William Grant linux: status Fix Released In Progress
2008-09-24 10:12:34 William Grant linux: statusexplanation Jorge brought this bug to my attention just now; this really needs to be fixed one way or another for beta, even if that would mean blacklisting e1000e altogether until this is resolved. Even with as little as I use the wired ethernet on my laptop, I wouldn't enjoy having to RMA it to fix it after a kernel bug. :/ Not fixed - LP closed the bug due to the reference in the changelog.
2008-09-24 16:42:16 Leonardo Silva Amaral bug added attachment 'DETECT_INTEL_E1000E_BUGGY.sh' (DETECT_INTEL_E1000E_BUGGY.sh)
2008-09-24 20:47:35 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Confirmed Fix Committed
2008-09-25 16:21:13 Craig bug assigned to linux (Gentoo Linux)
2008-09-25 16:23:55 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Unknown Confirmed
2008-09-25 18:07:44 Bug Watch Updater linux: status In Progress Incomplete
2008-09-26 02:06:15 Tom Jaeger bug added attachment 'messages' (messages)
2008-09-26 02:06:15 Tom Jaeger bug added attachment 'eth0.dump' (eth0.dump)
2008-09-26 02:06:15 Tom Jaeger bug added attachment 'e1000e.ko' (e1000e.ko)
2008-09-27 18:18:25 Shwan description In some circumstances it appears possible for the 2.6.27-rc kernels to corrupt the NVRAM used by some Intel network parts to store data such as MAC addresses. This is limited to the new e1000e driver, and reports have only appeared from users of "82566 and 82567 based LAN parts (ich8 and ich9)" (to quote Intel). The reports seem to be isolated to laptops, but it is not clear if this is because desktop/server parts are not vulnerable, or if use cases simply increase the chances of laptop users being hit. Once this corruption has occurred, recovery may be possible via a BIOS update, but may well require replacement of the hardware. Use of Intel's IABUTIL.EXE is strongly discouraged, as it will worsen the problem to the point where the network part will no longer appear on the PCI bus. (this is a new description, the original one was based on too much guesswork. Below are the URLs originally referenced) http://www.blahonga.org/~art/rant.html (search for "em0") http://www.mail-archive.com/e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg00360.html http://www.mail-archive.com/e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg00398.html In some circumstances it appears possible for the 2.6.27-rc kernels to corrupt the NVRAM used by some Intel network parts to store data such as MAC addresses. This is limited to the new e1000e driver, and reports have only appeared from users of "82566 and 82567 based LAN parts (ich8 and ich9)" (to quote Intel). The reports seem to be isolated to laptops, but it is not clear if this is because desktop/server parts are not vulnerable, or if use cases simply increase the chances of laptop users being hit. Once this corruption has occurred, recovery may be possible via a BIOS update, but may well require replacement of the hardware. Use of Intel's IABUTIL.EXE is strongly discouraged, as it will worsen the problem to the point where the network part will no longer appear on the PCI bus. (this is a new description, the original one was based on too much guesswork. Below are the URLs originally referenced) (the driver i blacklisted in Ubuntu for 2.6.27-rc in the latest releases, so if your network is not working, it doesn't have to be damaged, but just disabled in order to prevent any accidents until this bug is solved, don't wary!) http://www.blahonga.org/~art/rant.html (search for "em0") http://www.mail-archive.com/e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg00360.html http://www.mail-archive.com/e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg00398.html
2008-09-29 16:18:35 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Fix Committed Confirmed
2008-09-30 13:30:02 Tim Gardner linux: status In Progress Fix Committed
2008-09-30 13:30:02 Tim Gardner linux: statusexplanation Not fixed - LP closed the bug due to the reference in the changelog. UBUNTU: SAUCE: e1000e: Map NV RAM dynamically only when needed. I'm going to go with this until upstream converges on a solution that I'm happy with. One point of contention with upstream is that Ubuntu is using the e1000e driver from Intel's SourceForge project, when we ought to be using the in-kernel version (since that is where any permanent fixes for this issue will go).
2008-09-30 13:45:19 Matt Zimmerman linux: statusexplanation UBUNTU: SAUCE: e1000e: Map NV RAM dynamically only when needed. I'm going to go with this until upstream converges on a solution that I'm happy with. One point of contention with upstream is that Ubuntu is using the e1000e driver from Intel's SourceForge project, when we ought to be using the in-kernel version (since that is where any permanent fixes for this issue will go). Removing beta milestone since the workaround is sufficient for beta
2008-09-30 13:45:19 Matt Zimmerman linux: milestone ubuntu-8.10-beta
2008-09-30 18:33:43 Steve Langasek linux: statusexplanation Removing beta milestone since the workaround is sufficient for beta
2008-09-30 18:33:43 Steve Langasek linux: milestone ubuntu-8.10
2008-10-02 11:47:45 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Incomplete In Progress
2008-10-03 00:15:36 Launchpad Janitor linux: status Fix Committed Fix Released
2008-10-03 15:39:57 Michael Losonsky linux: status Fix Released In Progress
2008-10-03 15:50:24 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Confirmed Fix Released
2008-10-03 17:03:38 Colin Watson linux: status In Progress Fix Released
2008-10-03 17:03:38 Colin Watson linux: statusexplanation 2.6.27-4.7 was rejected because 2.6.27-5.8 had already been uploaded. I just accepted the binaries for 2.6.27-5.8 into the archive, and they should be available within the hour; it will take a little bit longer for the 'linux' etc. metapackages to catch up with this.
2008-10-05 09:18:07 Bug Watch Updater linux: status In Progress Fix Released
2008-10-09 07:48:41 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Confirmed In Progress
2008-10-10 06:58:46 Bug Watch Updater linux: status In Progress Fix Released
2008-10-14 00:27:21 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Confirmed Fix Released
2008-10-16 00:51:34 Bug Watch Updater linux: status In Progress Fix Released
2008-10-18 20:17:26 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Fix Released Confirmed
2008-10-24 12:00:41 Amit Kucheria bug assigned to linux-lpia (Ubuntu)
2008-10-24 12:01:41 Amit Kucheria linux-lpia: status New Fix Committed
2008-10-24 12:01:41 Amit Kucheria linux-lpia: assignee amitk
2008-10-24 12:01:41 Amit Kucheria linux-lpia: importance Undecided Critical
2008-10-24 12:01:41 Amit Kucheria linux-lpia: statusexplanation
2008-10-24 12:01:41 Amit Kucheria linux-lpia: milestone ubuntu-8.10
2008-10-24 13:05:19 Launchpad Janitor linux-lpia: status Fix Committed Fix Released
2008-10-24 14:50:43 Bug Watch Updater linux: status Confirmed Fix Released
2008-11-01 00:35:42 Basilisk linux: assignee timg-tpi
2008-11-01 00:35:42 Basilisk linux: statusexplanation Hi Chris, Just an update here in case you missed chatter in #kernel on Sept 03, tim has already began investigating this issue.
2008-11-01 00:37:05 Basilisk linux: assignee bluebal-1
2008-11-01 01:14:02 William Grant linux: assignee bluebal-1 timg-tpi
2009-07-18 07:51:07 Launchpad Janitor branch linked lp:ubuntu/karmic/linux-lpia
2009-10-07 17:48:32 Vajra Vrtti removed subscriber Vajra Vrtti
2009-10-08 00:09:10 dave graham attachment added e1000e-1.0.15.shownvm.patch http://launchpadlibrarian.net/33264068/e1000e-1.0.15.shownvm.patch
2009-12-02 03:54:22 hosseinonline linux (Ubuntu): status Fix Released Confirmed
2009-12-02 04:20:17 Steve Langasek linux (Ubuntu): status Confirmed Fix Released
2009-12-02 09:45:24 Nico Crama removed subscriber cosorosso
2009-12-02 14:04:17 Mike Carpenter removed subscriber Mike Carpenter
2011-02-04 08:28:52 Bug Watch Updater linux: importance Unknown Medium
2011-02-04 08:40:56 Aurimas Fišeras removed subscriber Aurimas Fišeras
2011-02-04 10:16:30 Bug Watch Updater linux (Gentoo Linux): importance Unknown Medium
2011-02-04 10:26:13 Philipp Dreimann removed subscriber Philipp Dreimann
2011-02-04 12:12:52 patrick removed subscriber patrick
2011-02-14 15:24:44 Bug Watch Updater linux (Mandriva): importance Unknown Critical
2011-02-14 15:36:20 Pascal d'Hermilly removed subscriber Pascal d'Hermilly
2011-02-14 15:38:39 Marco Zani removed subscriber marco
2011-02-15 05:50:18 Thomas McKay removed subscriber Thomas McKay
2011-02-15 10:24:13 Hew McLachlan removed subscriber Hew McLachlan
2011-02-15 18:59:48 Gert van Dijk removed subscriber Gert van Dijk
2011-04-18 05:16:47 Troex Nevelin bug added subscriber Troex Nevelin
2011-04-18 10:38:50 Mathias Menzer removed subscriber Mathias Menzer
2011-04-18 15:07:08 Feri removed subscriber Feri
2011-05-04 06:46:40 Aleksi Ikäheimo removed subscriber Aleksi Ikäheimo
2012-02-23 23:15:07 Kai Kasurinen removed subscriber Kai Kasurinen
2017-10-27 13:03:31 Bug Watch Updater linux (Fedora): importance Unknown Medium
2017-10-27 19:54:42 Arve Bersvendsen removed subscriber Arve Bersvendsen
2017-10-29 18:26:24 dweber bug added subscriber dweber
2017-11-23 22:25:18 Russoz removed subscriber Russoz
2017-12-08 07:52:05 Dana Goyette removed subscriber Dana Goyette
2018-07-04 16:28:11 Bug Watch Updater linux (Suse): importance Unknown Critical