DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Daly <jeffd@silicom-usa.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
	"Wang, Haiyue" <haiyue.wang@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
	"qi.z.zhang@intel.com" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>,
	"john.mcnamara@intel.com" <john.mcnamara@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] net/ixgbe: Treat 1G Cu SFPs as 1G SX on the X550 devices
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2022 15:11:46 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <VI1PR0402MB35173B566DCBB6DC33E1720AEAEF9@VI1PR0402MB3517.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2937496.687JKscXgg@thomas>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2022 8:19 AM
> To: Wang, Haiyue <haiyue.wang@intel.com>
> Cc: Jeff Daly <jeffd@silicom-usa.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Stephen Douthit
> <stephend@silicom-usa.com>; qi.z.zhang@intel.com;
> john.mcnamara@intel.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/ixgbe: Treat 1G Cu SFPs as 1G SX on the X550
> devices
> 
> Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or
> opening attachments.
> 
> 
> 14/04/2022 14:13, Wang, Haiyue:
> > From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > > 14/04/2022 03:31, Wang, Haiyue:
> > > > From: jeffd@silicom-usa.com <jeffd@silicom-usa.com>
> > > > > From: Stephen Douthit <stephend@silicom-usa.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > 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 <stephend@silicom-usa.com>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Daly <jeffd@silicom-usa.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  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)
> > > >
> > > > NACK.
> > > >
> > > > As for 1G Cu SFP treating it as 1G SX, some 1G-Base-T SFP modules
> > > > require the use of RX_ILOS and some Intel Ethernet products don't
> support that.
> > >
> > > So what is the solution?
> > >
> > > > And the DPDK keeps the same design with kernel.
> > >
> > > It should not be a justification for limiting DPDK features.
> >
> > Um, this is upstream version driver to keep the same behavior.
> >
> > There are also some kind of custom release ...
> 
> I don't understand.
> Upstream DPDK (and Linux) must support a maximum of hardware and
> setup.
> Why rejecting adding such compatibility?
> 

so, I will ask a question directly in case people just aren't inclined to make a suggestion
(and perhaps this should be also directed to the Linux kernel driver mailing list), but
if there's a driver option: module_param(allow_unsupported_sfp, uint, 0) to allow 
enabling non-official support of some SFPs, then I can't image that it wouldn't also be
acceptable to add: module_param(cu_sfp_as sx, uint, 0) to be able to select whether
to enable this specific handling as well?

if a patch of this nature is acceptable to Linux driver maintainers, then it would also be
here as well according to your explanation of the NACK,  correct?



  reply	other threads:[~2022-04-14 15:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-03-07 22:34 jeffd
2022-04-13 14:21 ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-05-20  0:14   ` Zhang, Qi Z
2022-05-20 18:02     ` Jeff Daly
2022-05-23  5:36       ` Zhang, Qi Z
2022-05-23 14:13         ` Jeff Daly
2022-05-23 23:22           ` Zhang, Qi Z
2022-05-25 15:23             ` Jeff Daly
2022-05-26  0:28               ` Zhang, Qi Z
2022-04-14  1:31 ` Wang, Haiyue
2022-04-14  9:42   ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-04-14 12:13     ` Wang, Haiyue
2022-04-14 12:18       ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-04-14 15:11         ` Jeff Daly [this message]
2022-04-14 15:43           ` Stephen Hemminger
2022-04-14 17:06             ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-04-19  9:11               ` Morten Brørup
2022-04-19 12:32                 ` Wang, Haiyue
2022-04-15  1:10           ` Wang, Haiyue
2022-05-26 20:43 ` [PATCH v2] " Jeff Daly
2022-05-29 22:49   ` Zhang, Qi Z
2022-05-30 13:32     ` Jeff Daly
2022-05-30 13:50       ` Zhang, Qi Z
2022-05-31 12:30         ` Jeff Daly
2022-05-31 13:38           ` Zhang, Qi Z

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=VI1PR0402MB35173B566DCBB6DC33E1720AEAEF9@VI1PR0402MB3517.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=jeffd@silicom-usa.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=haiyue.wang@intel.com \
    --cc=john.mcnamara@intel.com \
    --cc=qi.z.zhang@intel.com \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).