[REGRESSION] e1000e probe/link detection fails since 6.2 kernel

[REGRESSION] e1000e probe/link detection fails since 6.2 kernel

[Takashi Iwai]

Hi,

we've got a regression report for e1000e device on Lenovo T460p since
6.2 kernel (with openSUSE Tumbleweed).  The details are found in
  https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1209254

It seems that the driver can't detect the 1000Mbps but only 10/100Mbps
link, eventually making the device unusable.

On 6.1.12:
[    5.119117] e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver
[    5.119120] e1000e: Copyright(c) 1999 - 2015 Intel Corporation.
[    5.121754] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6: Interrupt Throttling Rate (ints/sec) set to dynamic conservative mode
[    7.905526] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): Failed to disable ULP
[    7.988925] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): registered PHC clock
[    8.069935] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: (PCI Express:2.5GT/s:Width x1) 50:7b:9d:cf:13:43
[    8.069942] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
[    8.072691] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: MAC: 12, PHY: 12, PBA No: 1000FF-0FF
[   11.643919] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
[   15.437437] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None

On 6.2.4:
[    4.344140] e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver
[    4.344143] e1000e: Copyright(c) 1999 - 2015 Intel Corporation.
[    4.344933] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6: Interrupt Throttling Rate (ints/sec) set to dynamic conservative mode
[    7.113334] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): Failed to disable ULP
[    7.201715] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): registered PHC clock
[    7.284038] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: (PCI Express:2.5GT/s:Width x1) 50:7b:9d:cf:13:43
[    7.284044] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
[    7.284125] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: MAC: 12, PHY: 12, PBA No: 1000FF-0FF
[   10.897973] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
[   10.897977] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
[   14.710059] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
[   14.710064] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
[   59.894807] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
[   59.894812] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
[   63.808662] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
[   63.808668] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO

The same problem persists with 6.3-rc3.

Can you guys check what can go wrong, or if there is a fix?


Thanks!

Takashi

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [REGRESSION] e1000e probe/link detection fails since 6.2 kernel

[Paul Menzel]

Dear Takashi,


Am 28.03.23 um 14:40 schrieb Takashi Iwai:

> we've got a regression report for e1000e device on Lenovo T460p since
> 6.2 kernel (with openSUSE Tumbleweed).  The details are found in
>    https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1209254

Thank you for forwarding the report.

> It seems that the driver can't detect the 1000Mbps but only 10/100Mbps
> link, eventually making the device unusable.
> 
> On 6.1.12:
> [    5.119117] e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver
> [    5.119120] e1000e: Copyright(c) 1999 - 2015 Intel Corporation.
> [    5.121754] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6: Interrupt Throttling Rate (ints/sec) set to dynamic conservative mode
> [    7.905526] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): Failed to disable ULP
> [    7.988925] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): registered PHC clock
> [    8.069935] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: (PCI Express:2.5GT/s:Width x1) 50:7b:9d:cf:13:43
> [    8.069942] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
> [    8.072691] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: MAC: 12, PHY: 12, PBA No: 1000FF-0FF
> [   11.643919] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> [   15.437437] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> 
> On 6.2.4:
> [    4.344140] e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver
> [    4.344143] e1000e: Copyright(c) 1999 - 2015 Intel Corporation.
> [    4.344933] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6: Interrupt Throttling Rate (ints/sec) set to dynamic conservative mode
> [    7.113334] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): Failed to disable ULP
> [    7.201715] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): registered PHC clock
> [    7.284038] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: (PCI Express:2.5GT/s:Width x1) 50:7b:9d:cf:13:43
> [    7.284044] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
> [    7.284125] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: MAC: 12, PHY: 12, PBA No: 1000FF-0FF
> [   10.897973] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> [   10.897977] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
> [   14.710059] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> [   14.710064] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
> [   59.894807] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> [   59.894812] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
> [   63.808662] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> [   63.808668] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
> 
> The same problem persists with 6.3-rc3.
> 
> Can you guys check what can go wrong, or if there is a fix?

Does openSUSE Tumbleweed make it easy to bisect the regression at least 
on “rc level”? It be great if narrow it more down, so we know it for 
example regressed in 6.2-rc7.


Kind regards,

Paul

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [REGRESSION] e1000e probe/link detection fails since 6.2 kernel

[Takashi Iwai]

On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 16:39:01 +0200,
Paul Menzel wrote:
> 
> Dear Takashi,
> 
> 
> Am 28.03.23 um 14:40 schrieb Takashi Iwai:
> 
> > we've got a regression report for e1000e device on Lenovo T460p since
> > 6.2 kernel (with openSUSE Tumbleweed).  The details are found in
> >    https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1209254
> 
> Thank you for forwarding the report.
> 
> > It seems that the driver can't detect the 1000Mbps but only 10/100Mbps
> > link, eventually making the device unusable.
> > 
> > On 6.1.12:
> > [    5.119117] e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver
> > [    5.119120] e1000e: Copyright(c) 1999 - 2015 Intel Corporation.
> > [    5.121754] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6: Interrupt Throttling Rate (ints/sec) set to dynamic conservative mode
> > [    7.905526] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): Failed to disable ULP
> > [    7.988925] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): registered PHC clock
> > [    8.069935] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: (PCI Express:2.5GT/s:Width x1) 50:7b:9d:cf:13:43
> > [    8.069942] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
> > [    8.072691] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: MAC: 12, PHY: 12, PBA No: 1000FF-0FF
> > [   11.643919] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> > [   15.437437] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> > 
> > On 6.2.4:
> > [    4.344140] e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver
> > [    4.344143] e1000e: Copyright(c) 1999 - 2015 Intel Corporation.
> > [    4.344933] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6: Interrupt Throttling Rate (ints/sec) set to dynamic conservative mode
> > [    7.113334] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): Failed to disable ULP
> > [    7.201715] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): registered PHC clock
> > [    7.284038] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: (PCI Express:2.5GT/s:Width x1) 50:7b:9d:cf:13:43
> > [    7.284044] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
> > [    7.284125] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: MAC: 12, PHY: 12, PBA No: 1000FF-0FF
> > [   10.897973] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> > [   10.897977] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
> > [   14.710059] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> > [   14.710064] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
> > [   59.894807] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> > [   59.894812] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
> > [   63.808662] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> > [   63.808668] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
> > 
> > The same problem persists with 6.3-rc3.
> > 
> > Can you guys check what can go wrong, or if there is a fix?
> 
> Does openSUSE Tumbleweed make it easy to bisect the regression at
> least on “rc level”? It be great if narrow it more down, so we know
> it for example regressed in 6.2-rc7.

Not easy, unfortunately.  The official TW kernel moved to a newer
version only after the final release.  Although the rc kernel packages
are provided as unofficial packages, they are transient and go away at
each update, so we have no archives for testing the older ones.

Or, if you can suggest some commit to be tested for revert, I can
create a test kernel package at any time.


thanks,

Takashi

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [REGRESSION] e1000e probe/link detection fails since 6.2 kernel

[Bagas Sanjaya]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 407 bytes --]

On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 04:39:01PM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> Does openSUSE Tumbleweed make it easy to bisect the regression at least on
> “rc level”? It be great if narrow it more down, so we know it for example
> regressed in 6.2-rc7.
> 

Alternatively, can you do bisection using kernel sources from Linus's
tree (git required)?

-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

Re: [REGRESSION] e1000e probe/link detection fails since 6.2 kernel

[Bagas Sanjaya]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2916 bytes --]

On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 02:40:33PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> we've got a regression report for e1000e device on Lenovo T460p since
> 6.2 kernel (with openSUSE Tumbleweed).  The details are found in
>   https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1209254
> 
> It seems that the driver can't detect the 1000Mbps but only 10/100Mbps
> link, eventually making the device unusable.
> 
> On 6.1.12:
> [    5.119117] e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver
> [    5.119120] e1000e: Copyright(c) 1999 - 2015 Intel Corporation.
> [    5.121754] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6: Interrupt Throttling Rate (ints/sec) set to dynamic conservative mode
> [    7.905526] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): Failed to disable ULP
> [    7.988925] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): registered PHC clock
> [    8.069935] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: (PCI Express:2.5GT/s:Width x1) 50:7b:9d:cf:13:43
> [    8.069942] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
> [    8.072691] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: MAC: 12, PHY: 12, PBA No: 1000FF-0FF
> [   11.643919] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> [   15.437437] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> 
> On 6.2.4:
> [    4.344140] e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver
> [    4.344143] e1000e: Copyright(c) 1999 - 2015 Intel Corporation.
> [    4.344933] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6: Interrupt Throttling Rate (ints/sec) set to dynamic conservative mode
> [    7.113334] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): Failed to disable ULP
> [    7.201715] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 0000:00:1f.6 (uninitialized): registered PHC clock
> [    7.284038] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: (PCI Express:2.5GT/s:Width x1) 50:7b:9d:cf:13:43
> [    7.284044] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
> [    7.284125] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: MAC: 12, PHY: 12, PBA No: 1000FF-0FF
> [   10.897973] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> [   10.897977] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
> [   14.710059] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> [   14.710064] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
> [   59.894807] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> [   59.894812] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
> [   63.808662] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: None
> [   63.808668] e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
> 
> The same problem persists with 6.3-rc3.
> 

I'm adding this to regzbot:

#regzbot ^introduced: v6.1.12..v6.2.4
#regzbot: e1000 probe/link detection fails since v6.2

Thanks.

-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [REGRESSION] e1000e probe/link detection fails since 6.2 kernel

[Takashi Iwai]

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 10:40:44 +0200,
Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 04:39:01PM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> > Does openSUSE Tumbleweed make it easy to bisect the regression at least on
> > “rc level”? It be great if narrow it more down, so we know it for example
> > regressed in 6.2-rc7.
> > 
> 
> Alternatively, can you do bisection using kernel sources from Linus's
> tree (git required)?

That'll be a last resort, if no one has idea at all :)


Takashi

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [REGRESSION] e1000e probe/link detection fails since 6.2 kernel

[Jakub Kicinski]

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 10:48:36 +0200 Takashi Iwai wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 10:40:44 +0200,
> Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 04:39:01PM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:  
> > > Does openSUSE Tumbleweed make it easy to bisect the regression at least on
> > > “rc level”? It be great if narrow it more down, so we know it for example
> > > regressed in 6.2-rc7.
> > >   
> > 
> > Alternatively, can you do bisection using kernel sources from Linus's
> > tree (git required)?  
> 
> That'll be a last resort, if no one has idea at all :)

I had a quick look yesterday, there's only ~6 or so commits to e1000e.
Should be a fairly quick bisection, hopefully?

Adding Sasha.

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [REGRESSION] e1000e probe/link detection fails since 6.2 kernel

[Takashi Iwai]

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 21:12:32 +0200,
Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 10:48:36 +0200 Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 10:40:44 +0200,
> > Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 04:39:01PM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:  
> > > > Does openSUSE Tumbleweed make it easy to bisect the regression at least on
> > > > “rc level”? It be great if narrow it more down, so we know it for example
> > > > regressed in 6.2-rc7.
> > > >   
> > > 
> > > Alternatively, can you do bisection using kernel sources from Linus's
> > > tree (git required)?  
> > 
> > That'll be a last resort, if no one has idea at all :)
> 
> I had a quick look yesterday, there's only ~6 or so commits to e1000e.
> Should be a fairly quick bisection, hopefully?

*IFF* it's an e1000e-specific bug, right?

Through a quick glance, the only significant change in e1000e is the
commit 1060707e3809
    ptp: introduce helpers to adjust by scaled parts per million

Others are only for MTP/ADP and new devices, which must be irrelevant.
The tracing must be irrelevant, and the kmap change must be OK.

Can 1060707e3809 be the cause of such a bug?


thanks,

Takashi

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [REGRESSION] e1000e probe/link detection fails since 6.2 kernel

[Takashi Iwai]

On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 08:30:17 +0200,
Takashi Iwai wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 21:12:32 +0200,
> Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 10:48:36 +0200 Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 10:40:44 +0200,
> > > Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 04:39:01PM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:  
> > > > > Does openSUSE Tumbleweed make it easy to bisect the regression at least on
> > > > > “rc level”? It be great if narrow it more down, so we know it for example
> > > > > regressed in 6.2-rc7.
> > > > >   
> > > > 
> > > > Alternatively, can you do bisection using kernel sources from Linus's
> > > > tree (git required)?  
> > > 
> > > That'll be a last resort, if no one has idea at all :)
> > 
> > I had a quick look yesterday, there's only ~6 or so commits to e1000e.
> > Should be a fairly quick bisection, hopefully?
> 
> *IFF* it's an e1000e-specific bug, right?
> 
> Through a quick glance, the only significant change in e1000e is the
> commit 1060707e3809
>     ptp: introduce helpers to adjust by scaled parts per million
> 
> Others are only for MTP/ADP and new devices, which must be irrelevant.
> The tracing must be irrelevant, and the kmap change must be OK.
> 
> Can 1060707e3809 be the cause of such a bug?

The bug reporter updated the entry and informed that this can be
false-positive; the problem could be triggered with the older kernel
out of sudden.  So he closed the bug as WORKSFORME.

#regzbot invalid: Problems likely not in kernel changes


thanks,

Takashi

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [REGRESSION] e1000e probe/link detection fails since 6.2 kernel

[Neftin, Sasha]

On 3/30/2023 13:35, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 08:30:17 +0200,
> Takashi Iwai wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 21:12:32 +0200,
>> Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 10:48:36 +0200 Takashi Iwai wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 10:40:44 +0200,
>>>> Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 04:39:01PM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
>>>>>> Does openSUSE Tumbleweed make it easy to bisect the regression at least on
>>>>>> “rc level”? It be great if narrow it more down, so we know it for example
>>>>>> regressed in 6.2-rc7.
>>>>>>    
>>>>>
>>>>> Alternatively, can you do bisection using kernel sources from Linus's
>>>>> tree (git required)?
>>>>
>>>> That'll be a last resort, if no one has idea at all :)
>>>
>>> I had a quick look yesterday, there's only ~6 or so commits to e1000e.
>>> Should be a fairly quick bisection, hopefully?
>>
>> *IFF* it's an e1000e-specific bug, right?
>>
>> Through a quick glance, the only significant change in e1000e is the
>> commit 1060707e3809
>>      ptp: introduce helpers to adjust by scaled parts per million
>>
>> Others are only for MTP/ADP and new devices, which must be irrelevant.
>> The tracing must be irrelevant, and the kmap change must be OK.
>>
>> Can 1060707e3809 be the cause of such a bug?
> 
> The bug reporter updated the entry and informed that this can be
> false-positive; the problem could be triggered with the older kernel
> out of sudden.  So he closed the bug as WORKSFORME.
> 
> #regzbot invalid: Problems likely not in kernel changes
I do not think the problem is with the kernel/SW/driver code. "Failed to 
disable ULP" (ultra-low power disabling)line in a dmesg log can indicate 
that the PHY of the LAN controller is inaccessible. Probably your laptop 
has an _LM SKU (CSME/AMT)of LAN controller (with manageability).
Unfortunately, we haven't had the reliable opportunity to interact with 
the CSME/AMT. Moreover, access to the PHY when CSME/AMT controls it 
could put the LAN controller in an unknown state.
This model of the laptop is no longer supported thought. Worth checking 
the option to disable CSME/AMT via BIOS.

So, somehow it worked previously. _V SKU should not hit on such a problem.
> 
> 
> thanks,
> 
> Takashi