From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F4B4A04FF; Tue, 24 May 2022 12:42:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1499340140; Tue, 24 May 2022 12:42:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 560A4400D6 for ; Tue, 24 May 2022 12:42:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDA95320093A; Tue, 24 May 2022 06:42:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 24 May 2022 06:42:49 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1653388968; x= 1653475368; bh=93g8lPJoQQxOfrB4iG7yRv2mZcGvS5YKz4S6r4uAEB8=; b=g v13k/KOINmlsHgWB0YvUAFPiPVuxBamI75YmIA+LDdLvmruFYZyYy0C9vWDSLVw1 9pyrc031euHYBuYtcjTGEYtQfYKEkwLj+D5R2kFWCrTSVxOoyGzzCZLy46YgIPv1 v3vozV26w/VWtTPNMOE5vOw2hEIHQi024Kb96veRxoFDXllnGeMqvunqffiyNVhp KYgtb4EMpRCXbgNHbrjN/wTnMdPTUEEZFYXHaKnyIyGHdqHkIwhCOezVb9Mab+BA 9oJUu5uD2onGLHrq176ryblDqqh14FuWttz5y4CHrsmtM/SGfEebpupGISm6Ho+3 osCZEsL2Qwz4ZGSI5L++g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1653388968; x= 1653475368; bh=93g8lPJoQQxOfrB4iG7yRv2mZcGvS5YKz4S6r4uAEB8=; b=G kIueZY8db2ve3y4DtF7Ez6HcSW1fTeDff0OE4uW3fOFGVtdkt0rF5+8S1XW/DCPh 5XQTVc1Kb+ppuweB2UGZHLsnqlu74uaunP+VKw7ElOKvOug6lNQXiRRvHRStJ/6Y FzJDJkfKRnAlQhnDqX028vtxJpEqxYXpRKAuqdIq1oCzOq5sJ6vBYndFWH5L9Cg0 X9wse587z7I4EJvhWOudTW0wj5MDH2lrJ8xtxOBaX1C8Bis32hogRqWom+QSLZ9+ w4nGE9KZDO821gluHSN9WQOu8it+oZsVs5mBqFZNk6vUVdVtPIctQKNFeEhnGrJB 3M61FSQ0/FwV5rUxo4CAQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrjeefgdefudcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvfevufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnheptdejieeifeehtdffgfdvleetueeffeehueejgfeuteeftddtieek gfekudehtdfgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrh homhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 24 May 2022 06:42:46 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Zhang, Qi Z" Cc: "Daly, Jeff" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Wang, Haiyue" , ferruh.yigit@amd.com, andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru, bruce.richardson@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ixgbe/base: Manual AN-37 for troublesome link partners for X550 SFI Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 12:42:38 +0200 Message-ID: <11811318.eQLIkvUDd3@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20220316181544.7251-1-jeffd@silicom-usa.com> <20220316185917.4448-1-jeffd@silicom-usa.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org 18/05/2022 02:03, Zhang, Qi Z: > From: Jeff Daly > > > > Some SFP link partners exhibit a disinclination to autonegotiate with X550 > > configured in SFI mode. This patch enables a manual AN-37 restart to work > > around the problem. > > This fix for some specific hardware in base code, > unfortunately Intel DPDK team don't have the device > and the knowledge to approve this, That's why the work is collaborative. You should get and trust knowledge from partners. The only concerns of a maintainer should be: - good feature design - good code quality - no regression in known cases > the base code is delivered by our kernel software team, > I will suggest you can send this to the kernel community > to get the right expert to review. Which kind of expert do you imagine to review? Intel team or Silicom people who are pushing these improvements? There is another problem with asking Linux kernel change first: the patch will land in GPL code, bringing difficulties to move in BSD-licensed base code. I suggest we make this process more flexible: 1/ a contributor sends a patch for DPDK base code with an explicit grant for backporting in any license. 2/ Intel checks that there is no DPDK regression 3/ patch is merged in DPDK 4/ Intel merges it in the internal base code 5/ Linux kernel team can backport the fix to Linux 6/ Any other OS can backport the fix in its driver Let's make the DPDK process open for everybody.