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 E6FB9A0352; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 10:29:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B208D4013F; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 10:29:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22C5640040 for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 10:29:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B1CD5C01C7; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 04:29:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 17 Dec 2021 04:29:46 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm3; bh= LWToCjlOxlUqwdUIRHg/AALONPHqwnsO6BnsClIwhY8=; b=OxsOKkwTfj9G8nY0 evs109fN96L7Cw+kTI0Wyh48NT9XTNbC5b0R/ZNGnLsXL9Z+Xdewutbmu+FGt4Ma 3T6RUNzFakRHsvb2rFr8+ozIAPTBFBcLQ2PcCfTAN2BHwCTEHCOTuulwVIMuYxej IzQVso1mON3ylNoN6vXjGTWcq/wReVcME5HuRYD3Y4EPdDx6gar/vXApBtwAjodV DeBg9JD5gtw0nMK5JPCQ3C48QMAbw4CpaMMWBZTniuNr0+ZOrkvK9OZp2MdoMN/3 FWPHR3x2BZYLTJr89z8gqFpQOjZZK+l0OvK5D5BJHoTogkmb3Kri8pic/XSTHo+O tRDF6A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=LWToCjlOxlUqwdUIRHg/AALONPHqwnsO6BnsClIwh Y8=; b=C1cFv6T3rdXJh9OjN2ZQ26cCCER1ckCfzyoNuGekxKcHXhlhnrm/jf7VB Vj6ShMR/x/iX1hTXDm/FAEza4SI7kdIjLegNOC6L2aUxIVRZufuuu8JR2HUwt+ND +f7aH0rJxRjwTfPOCzG755fUp0KK9J/KVgErKBhn+/vZmSZ/vR03I0E9cKSf6KQi BX4OabmqlqZK5E9m978PQ7P3gu7vQOEwHF3Ofd/pLuA8jiJ79TRPcXLfZnBQk9du m3syU7gZNO2mJ6bmQ/zGMNxxUKWamtAvWymPur31rEc/qwf1uWuWfkiPh30zgH8v SJUdARo9l7MJ/J6ruAEFbO8/qEyHA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvuddrleeigddthecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucggtf frrghtthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdejueei iedvffegheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhroh hmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 04:29:45 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Stephen Douthit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, wenw@silicom-usa.com, Haiyue Wang , qi.z.zhang@intel.com, ferruh.yigit@intel.com, yux.jiang@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] ixgbe SFP handling fixes Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 10:29:43 +0100 Message-ID: <4386149.cEBGB3zze1@thomas> In-Reply-To: <20211206221922.644187-1-stephend@silicom-usa.com> References: <20211206221922.644187-1-stephend@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 06/12/2021 23:19, Stephen Douthit: > Hello all, Hello, it seems to be your first contribution, welcome! > We have several platforms based on Intel's C3000 series of SoCs that > have integrated ixgbe devices (X550EM) operating in the "Native SFI" > mode (the 0x15c4 device ID). For ixgbe patches, you may Cc Haiyue Wang who is the maintainer of the driver. Tip: Cc is automatic when using --cc-cmd devtools/get-maintainer.sh > The first five patches in the series all fix issues relating to the ID > and setup of SFPs. > > Patch 6 allows slow to boot SFPs (like some XGS-PON modules) to work. > > Patch 7 enables 1G Cu to run with a warning, similar to other > unofficially supported modules covered by the allow_unsupported_sfp > flag. Currently we use this for g.Fast modules, but other modules that > enumerate as 1G Cu may also benefit. > > Since all of my testing was done on a C3000 platform, and the ixgbe > driver now covers a large number of devices, any regression testing that > can be done on other ixgbe devices would be greatly appreciated. Larger testing can be done during the release candidate phases, or even before -rc1 if the patches are applied quickly. It is waiting for Intel maintainers first. Thank you