From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr1-f67.google.com (mail-wr1-f67.google.com [209.85.221.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E66222BC8 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 12:43:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wr1-f67.google.com with SMTP id n1-v6so20714629wrt.10 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 03:43:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language; bh=0cG+n2yQb+vblv9qdr5K/JCDOqAV7mun+ZB5TkELXuQ=; b=rahwreivTq3PozWKSKhUCKn9vOL+CkNBeluK09PIk7R8p8GTxmYTzyQkBs8Cjl2C4l Dzxl5xcuZ6o0y1akTs+wIfM5MhO9AF7jePwnQHM6gUSmMYmQBXBEzb2vqnopRLBXS7HN NVcKBHx7KrbVtuTU3RCsSdaHyBExMx3zJo05HZir6iqtIOsNYuCeGeuJ39G5tp6vX7E3 aOfpGJCykVTSmgnLXOoxoxVWU+fXDIL7AYrhUqEKnkuXOvEPo5jkE26HbvcMCULPPLib QbpEKtQ5J1mLsf8m6kl8zN34S9sqSOY5TCDTmlaeRDxLuBPkcUIUXl2Lvj8QrCWH06QN sYog== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language; bh=0cG+n2yQb+vblv9qdr5K/JCDOqAV7mun+ZB5TkELXuQ=; b=cU3LU8nknm6vMmYZdqMVb8H6oppmjEltbZmerkovuz2TAnRe0CuBuLn9fOEFsaNsyg 2GngA40lFrgQJVRRHoVis+pOSXv5tehmwmWM2fi04bjpXPVyv5YARSjirbqyy2SwqdTq EFHM3yPibJd76tCfupIl9uLBj4lzLI8PSqv9UUVJEaZKPxJ1Yj6WnF9q7b++AtQ1GjBX 1w03+ZImQqTAQ0Ut13vfP++jpOm7yaYrQpuLfRYSx+sODNe7sTNwV+tLoyTy3YmjXA9Z SNU6ZOe6CzOX7xSGiZU973YD7qr7dvGsuLSu1xJA0z+MB6BbKs944M4Iar4Xi64dQno6 v3fg== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfohrJga7ffle/ajUim6TBH4pDwL2Hjn4HychUr5sAfc7U4QTtbam vW/6QL7tZMwiOqkhVdMpWJ4/coJQxv8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV62JOcs2DN5NGbnVsSO9nVF8+jOdagiqW3bq6spHONWO5TDqTPrR0xt96cNrTbAEbBmY9HUuRw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:47cb:: with SMTP id l11-v6mr14035290wrs.195.1539600221140; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 03:43:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.16.0.207] (host.78.145.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com. [62.23.145.78]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id l4-v6sm11585557wrb.92.2018.10.15.03.43.40 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 15 Oct 2018 03:43:40 -0700 (PDT) To: "Zhao1, Wei" , Ilya Maximets , "Zhang, Qi Z" Cc: "Lu, Wenzhuo" , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "stable@dpdk.org" , "dev@dpdk.org" References: <20180831123824eucas1p1cd2981c716c4764703e24c3eeb4d33c7~P_GOOSRuf0867908679eucas1p1K@eucas1p1.samsung.com> <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E706115327FA5E@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> <20180910150708eucas1p220c16857c4277b311ddc000b9337d9cb~TEk8KngQJ1365413654eucas1p2a@eucas1p2.samsung.com> <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E7061153284304@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> <20180912080338eucas1p1bfdacb30aa969cd607ccf99f64d6bf80~TmFveK2Dy2157121571eucas1p1U@eucas1p1.samsung.com> <20181011102428eucas1p2fe26b12282d2b456ddc2cb96ad7552f0~cht-bhDPv2507925079eucas1p2L@eucas1p2.samsung.com> <879a4ff6-b9a3-c8d8-9550-e252a053800a@6wind.com> From: Laurent Hardy Message-ID: <9d740a33-0e4d-8773-69c4-f118482b7ee5@6wind.com> Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 12:43:23 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: fix busy polling while fiber link update X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 10:43:42 -0000 Hi Wei, On 10/12/2018 09:36 AM, Zhao1, Wei wrote: >>>> Hi, laurent.hardy >>>> You are the author for the patch (* net/ixgbe: ensure link status is >> updated), why do you implement code that way? >>>> Is that must that set up link with wait? >>>> >>>> ixgbe_setup_link(hw, speed, true); >>>> >> The main issue which has lead to this patch has been reported through a test >> case with the autoneg enabled (which has been also reported in the pmd >> test provided along with the patch: >> http://patches.dpdk.org/comment/46253/). >> In this context, without the flag set the patch wasn't effective. > My question is whether we can change to: > > ixgbe_setup_link(hw, speed, false); > > in your patch, it is " ixgbe_setup_link(hw, speed, true);" > some user may need flexible in wait for complete. > > Yes, the parameter (autoneg_wait_to_complete) could be change to false. I redo the test following test plan provided through http://patches.dpdk.org/comment/46253/, with flag set to false and speed defined to 1Gb on switch side. In this case both ports goes properly up (nic used is 82599ES 10-Gigabit) with a correct link speed.