Hi Thorsten, On 2/25/23 11:56, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: > The I225-V are working fine, the other four make trouble.
right, but those are copper interfaces. > I am using transceiver modules AXS85-192-M3 from 10Gtek. It looks like they are not flashable (like flexoptix and others), so I presume these are "non-Intel"-branded. > The allow_unsupported_sfp=1 does not make a difference. Shouldn't there > be at least a syslog message if an unsupported sfp is detected? Just to be extra sure, you've added: ixgbe.allow_unsupported_sfp=1 to your kernel cmdline, right? I've checked with an up2date bookworm test-server and kernel 6.1.12-1.. when inserting a Intel-branded flexoptix SFP, I'll get this message: Feb 27 14:59:06 xxx kernel: ixgbe 0000:5e:00.0 ens2f0: detected SFP+: 5 whereas with a Arista-branded one, I'll get the same: Feb 27 15:00:30 xxx kernel: ixgbe 0000:5e:00.0 ens2f0: detected SFP+: 5 Just to document it.. this is dmesg from after rebooting the machine, there's no allow_unsupported_sfp set at all, and there's an Intel-branded SFP in one slot (ens2f0), an Arista-branded one in the other (ens2f1): [ 3.178235] ixgbe: Intel(R) 10 Gigabit PCI Express Network Driver [ 3.178385] ixgbe: Copyright (c) 1999-2016 Intel Corporation. [ 3.927189] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.0: Multiqueue Enabled: Rx Queue count = 63, Tx Queue count = 63 XDP Queue count = 0 [ 3.927726] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.0: 32.000 Gb/s available PCIe bandwidth (5.0 GT/s PCIe x8 link) [ 3.928058] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.0: MAC: 2, PHY: 19, SFP+: 5, PBA No: 0210FF-0FF [ 3.928320] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.0: 0c:c4:7a:8f:48:f6 [ 3.940393] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.0: Intel(R) 10 Gigabit Network Connection [ 4.121469] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.1: Multiqueue Enabled: Rx Queue count = 63, Tx Queue count = 63 XDP Queue count = 0 [ 4.122320] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.1: 32.000 Gb/s available PCIe bandwidth (5.0 GT/s PCIe x8 link) [ 4.122938] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.1: MAC: 2, PHY: 20, SFP+: 6, PBA No: 0210FF-0FF [ 4.123483] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.1: 0c:c4:7a:8f:48:f7 [ 4.134330] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.1: Intel(R) 10 Gigabit Network Connection [ 4.315894] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.0 ens2f0: renamed from eth2 [ 4.411504] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.1 ens2f1: renamed from eth3 [ 8.043579] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.0: registered PHC device on ens2f0 [ 8.227099] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.0 ens2f0: detected SFP+: 5 it's not obvious from the messages that one SFP is working and the other one is not. the only difference I can see is that the one with the Intel-branded SFP has this line: [ 8.043579] ixgbe 0000:5e:00.0: registered PHC device on ens2f0 there's also no difference wrt/ the debug level (I've testet with printk set to 7 and 8, no additional messages are shown). Hope that helps - my guess would be to try and verify with an Intel or Intel-flashed SFP to rule out. Hope that helps. Regards, Daniel
