From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Received: from mail-lf0-f53.google.com (mail-lf0-f53.google.com
[209.85.215.53]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFDA468CA
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 14:52:48 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-lf0-f53.google.com with SMTP id v186so38010701lfa.1
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 05:52:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references
:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=Yz38VbPHjblQsHKGqZXtyHWvd67EQ7MEsgKbla1nw1A=;
b=1ArGfpPVTOhN3gDxoW0FRsws+3cSk/NPi7aQ6kAM7CHsxWCIItDIRls1fAvrN/Je1X
w42YfEN2VuOKf2pKaEf0FuaMUIq07Vb5od5Myf50+c0f6gcho1rtiV18hkQG7AKCh1EY
AyhEr4qhqPNsSiaV97aQ2aggYbNHhPWzQl4lx9XDcYfzFiAxIkJZFWhBHrtWlhQzQjAb
y8QszcGHQug1oBlQr5JZH3sjTsYCP4Z0zfCBMT7FeUf39WYWai0vfsD4U1pRWaS7aZkP
ntIw7onAr6Fc2AMGwkVlE1jgvwwtg4Cv+rTvX/q2ivlkzWQyFOShUyjN7IpUwQnpC1+z
kZTw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to
:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=Yz38VbPHjblQsHKGqZXtyHWvd67EQ7MEsgKbla1nw1A=;
b=pOqB5HNPbl2jqIT79QCqNt8UlC7Kmrrn1sxNuqHzrwdl351DeKe3TKPZzwFKBvV8P8
kvxYdm1OGBKYVP9ZxKq+U1UMywJ/wwNkrVkzljqsj/YUPen1ymJViQQAxCA2XbVtJiUa
J4Gkq7joIYJYfSLXLODO7DbLDuJtOxRAuKlK9i1dQeUBgR4am4adlzHS2OoaHEABFanv
g6ylMJ1JxxFqQG022JvMpQpgKMHCQXydHnBDJyq8ynzglB1e6lCuo9MsDBNwPGmaJzxS
/foE3j3fkFbnFIBMVDYXVI3K0c/zKcCDCKsNEdeX0r3FMy7/MPK0XUuWgPpt5o2InSl3
APxg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXJRX+IODqR7N370ldi11lGGKfuOgsVTbLOP0o4i70qDMbO0q2U1j8pA2pYnnLhDHQs7
X-Received: by 10.46.75.1 with SMTP id y1mr299lja.65.1484313899582;
Fri, 13 Jan 2017 05:24:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from platinum (2a01cb0c03c651000226b0fffeed02fc.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr.
[2a01:cb0c:3c6:5100:226:b0ff:feed:2fc])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v17sm3886481lja.43.2017.01.13.05.24.58
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256);
Fri, 13 Jan 2017 05:24:59 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 14:24:55 +0100
From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@dev.6wind.com>
Cc: "Rowden, Aaron F" <aaron.f.rowden@intel.com>, Christos Ricudis
<ricudis.christos@gmail.com>, "Zhang, Helin" <helin.zhang@intel.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>
Message-ID: <20170113142455.05ac6c06@platinum>
In-Reply-To: <20170112145554.44506d05@glumotte.dev.6wind.com>
References: <2BF7FCC7-B2DF-43EE-B5F8-2F3271FB3DA1@gmail.com>
<20170110162849.2256dc6e@glumotte.dev.6wind.com>
<F35DEAC7BCE34641BA9FAC6BCA4A12E71A98F8FE@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
<1A089981-6412-47FD-A46A-95A958D5E206@gmail.com>
<FC7A99FCE8F15942AB8D6F91FF66D8F694836A60@ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com>
<20170112145554.44506d05@glumotte.dev.6wind.com>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] i40e_aq_get_phy_capabilities() fails when using SFP+
with no link
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 13:52:49 -0000
Hi,
On Thu, 12 Jan 2017 14:55:54 +0100, Olivier MATZ
<olivier.matz@dev.6wind.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>=20
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 20:51:58 +0000, "Rowden, Aaron F"
> <aaron.f.rowden@intel.com> wrote:
> > Hi Helin,
> >=20
> > I'm checking on this to see why it could be failing but I don=E2=80=99t
> > think this is one part of formal validation. Intel modules are
> > always what is recommended.
> >=20
> > Aaron
> > =20
> > > Hi Helin,=20
> > > =20
> > > > On 11 Jan 2017, at 09:08, Zhang, Helin <helin.zhang@intel.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >=20
> > > > Hi Aaron
> > > >=20
> > > > Is the SFP+ (Finisar FTLX8571D3BCL) supported and validated by
> > > > Intel? It seems there is some PHY issue in this case. =20
> > >=20
> > > As the original reporter of this issue, I will test with validated
> > > SFP+s and will report on my testing.=20
> > >=20
> > > Shouldn=E2=80=99t unsupported SFP+s be blacklisted in the I40E driver=
?=20
> > > =20
>=20
> Just to let you know that in my case the SFP are Intel ones.
> Maybe it's a different issue.
>=20
> I see there are some i40e fixes in the net-next repo, I'll give a try
> with this version.
The issue still exists in net-next.
I did a git bissect, and the commit that introduces the issue is:
f4668a33efe5 ("net/i40e: fix link status change interrupt") [1]
If I revert it (with some conflicts), the problem I described
in [2] disappear.
Helin, Jinging, do you know what would be the consequences of reverting
this patch?
Christos, I don't know if it also helps for yor issue. If no, sorry for
having squatted your topic, the symptoms looked quite similar at first
glance.
Thanks,
Olivier
[1] http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk/commit/?id=3Df4668a33efe5
[2] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-January/054401.html