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 52CDAA050C; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 16:21:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1D1D4068E; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 16:21:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40B814068B for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 16:21:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D34085C0262; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:21:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:21:21 -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=1649859681; x= 1649946081; bh=UZXHHt5eYCMxsO/GoaJodJ5XsyT4jS1HjKSrgdTJlIo=; b=q H6DNWXEBrJJv1JuFBMW3amfuFn13bWdcZfAque8F1sRlaxXGsi0GdYOtrIa/f7u0 fv5VJvcNfZHusT1Xoh+CCyIn9rdKQ8uRB6di/LWS0Gh2qMEReRdElHqQK9wL7Rvh 9XVWUhF3vOtTUoC0AJN9a98kLsLMQFnPcjR4BTyf3zZYFeuePVYQM/iM7pLqP4Lx CcfJ4QTNAF/gcmnqL6baBRtB7uROqWAfnt3BjQEy3fPxFxJRUpVafJMVSaav/lG+ 17idOSTg1JMhvIi8UkjhgH/8s7puFOwTU6FNsd1YB4hpM+3Od0mir5dStKO3nhMp gkfcO449iKjCtNL+SCYTw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; 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:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1649859681; x=1649946081; bh=UZXHHt5eYCMxs O/GoaJodJ5XsyT4jS1HjKSrgdTJlIo=; b=uCkIxnLE9qNrhGylu4Ar3PdVDZtga odlORnhXE00nhSYjx0hKg1PYanLvjVIDfRdFQDb6YXFrVKAiAsuDk0jp1rF4hfLt y5Q0a4YQnJlY5nGyzml3o3wlDKM6mi7haJWNHnuLnRx1Nf8w8kqhCZ5ujfFmlIuV SB4scrSbqPJzzmbSXyjZeRUKuLOgvA2+9Df3V2K64Idrld9ptpPPoC2T/w88IpTK q4Xi0SJ9Lsgm6Em6ibZckqySKMQ/elWbrUYiOYVwJo8BbENW1bl4PFDBAw9EzOM+ L/KVqfLYNmA1ev/uxOIp3KalSKErhfrWckyZYKXgGsztLe6i+0dn300+Q== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvvddrudeluddggeekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudeggfdvfeduffdtfeeglefghfeukefgfffhueejtdetuedtjeeu ieeivdffgeehnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrh homhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:21:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: dev@dpdk.org Cc: Stephen Douthit , Jeff Daly , Haiyue Wang , Qiming Yang , Wenjun Wu Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/ixgbe: Treat 1G Cu SFPs as 1G SX on the X550 devices Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 16:21:18 +0200 Message-ID: <1681763.yIU609i1g2@thomas> In-Reply-To: <20220307223442.28012-1-jeffd@silicom-usa.com> References: <20220307223442.28012-1-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 Please, could we have a review of this patch? +Cc new ixgbe maintainers 07/03/2022 23:34, jeffd@silicom-usa.com: > From: Stephen Douthit > > 1G Cu SFPs are not officially supported on the X552/X553 family of devices > but treat them as 1G SX modules since they usually work. Print a warning > though since support isn't validated, similar to what already happens for > other unofficially supported SFPs enabled via the allow_unsupported_sfps > parameter inherited from the mainline Linux driver. > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Douthit > Signed-off-by: Jeff Daly > --- > drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_x550.c | 14 +++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_x550.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_x550.c > index 8810d1658e..8d1bc6c80d 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_x550.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_x550.c > @@ -1538,9 +1538,21 @@ STATIC s32 ixgbe_supported_sfp_modules_X550em(struct ixgbe_hw *hw, bool *linear) > case ixgbe_sfp_type_1g_lha_core1: > *linear = false; > break; > - case ixgbe_sfp_type_unknown: > + /* Copper SFPs are not officially supported for x550em devices, but can > + * often be made to work at fixed 1G speeds. Pretend they're 1g_sx > + * modules here to allow g.Fast DSL SFPs to work. > + */ > case ixgbe_sfp_type_1g_cu_core0: > + EWARN(hw, "Pretending that unsupported 1g_cu SFP is 1g_sx\n"); > + *linear = false; > + hw->phy.sfp_type = ixgbe_sfp_type_1g_sx_core0; > + break; > case ixgbe_sfp_type_1g_cu_core1: > + EWARN(hw, "Pretending that unsupported 1g_cu SFP is 1g_sx\n"); > + *linear = false; > + hw->phy.sfp_type = ixgbe_sfp_type_1g_sx_core1; > + break; > + case ixgbe_sfp_type_unknown: > default: > return IXGBE_ERR_SFP_NOT_SUPPORTED; > }