On Fri, 2018-11-09 at 13:18 +0000, Luca Boccassi wrote: > On Wed, 2018-11-07 at 18:27 +0000, Zhang, Qi Z wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Luca Boccassi [mailto:bl...@debian.org] > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 7, 2018 5:55 AM > > > To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; Chas Williams <3chas3@gma > > > il > > > .com>; > > > dev@dpdk.org > > > Cc: Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo...@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin > > > <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; sta...@dpdk.org > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] net/ixgbe: fix x550 code to handle > > > unidentified > > > PHY > > > > > > On Tue, 2018-11-06 at 23:31 +0000, Zhang, Qi Z wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Chas Williams [mailto:3ch...@gmail.com] > > > > > Sent: Monday, November 5, 2018 11:19 AM > > > > > To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; Luca Boccassi <bluca@ > > > > > de > > > > > bian > > > > > .org>; dev@dpdk.org > > > > > Cc: Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo...@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin > > > > > <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; sta...@dpdk.org > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] net/ixgbe: fix x550 code to > > > > > handle > > > > > unidentified PHY > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/05/2018 12:41 PM, Zhang, Qi Z wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: Luca Boccassi [mailto:bl...@debian.org] > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, November 2, 2018 8:19 AM > > > > > > > To: dev@dpdk.org > > > > > > > Cc: Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo...@intel.com>; Ananyev, > > > > > > > Konstantin > > > > > > > <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@i > > > > > > > nt > > > > > > > el.c > > > > > > > om>; > > > > > > > 3ch...@gmail.com; Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org>; > > > > > > > stable@ > > > > > > > dpdk > > > > > > > .org > > > > > > > Subject: [PATCH v3 1/2] net/ixgbe: fix x550 code to > > > > > > > handle > > > > > > > unidentified PHY > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ixgbe_identify_sfp_module_X550em() was missing the code > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > handle > > > > > > > unidentified PHY that has been there in 82599 so it was > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > able to > > > > > > > complete initialization of ixgbe sequence if no sfp > > > > > > > plugged > > > > > > > in. > > > > > > > Port it over to return an appropriate type and complete > > > > > > > init > > > > > > > sequence > > > > > > > properly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fixes: d2e72774e58c ("ixgbe/base: support X550") > > > > > > > Cc: sta...@dpdk.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org> > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > v2: refresh to remove merge conflict with master > > > > > > > v3: coalesce fix into ixgbe_identify_sfp_module_X550em to > > > > > > > avoid > > > > > > > code duplication, improve comment > > > > > > > > > > > > > > drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_x550.c | 6 ++++++ > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_x550.c > > > > > > > b/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_x550.c > > > > > > > index f7b98af52..a88d5c86a 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_x550.c > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_x550.c > > > > > > > @@ -1561,6 +1561,12 @@ s32 > > > > > > > > > > ixgbe_identify_sfp_module_X550em(struct > > > > > > > ixgbe_hw *hw) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > status = ixgbe_identify_module_generic(hw); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + /* Set PHY type none if no PHY detected to allow > > > > > > > init > > > > > > > without SFP */ > > > > > > > + if (hw->phy.type == ixgbe_phy_unknown) { > > > > > > > + hw->phy.type = ixgbe_phy_none; > > > > > > > > > > > > Set PHY type to none for a device that does have PHY looks > > > > > > weird. > > > > > > does ixgeb_phy_generic works here? > > > > > > > > > > Yes, it does seem strange but that's what > > > > > ixgbe_identify_sfp_module_generic > > > > > seems to do: > > > > > > > > > > err_read_i2c_eeprom: > > > > > hw->phy.sfp_type = ixgbe_sfp_type_not_present; > > > > > if (hw->phy.type != ixgbe_phy_nl) { > > > > > hw->phy.id = 0; > > > > > hw->phy.type = ixgbe_phy_unknown; > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > The QSFP version a little more forceful: > > > > > > > > > > err_read_i2c_eeprom: > > > > > hw->phy.sfp_type = ixgbe_sfp_type_not_present; > > > > > hw->phy.id = 0; > > > > > hw->phy.type = ixgbe_phy_unknown; > > > > > > > > > > If we go forward without setting the phy_type to none, we > > > > > will > > > > > eventually run > > > > > into issues calling other phy routines. > > > > > > > > > > So should a lack of SFP, reset the PHY type? It's hazy > > > > > because > > > > > the > > > > > difference > > > > > between PHY and SFP isn't that clear to me here. > > > > > > > > I'm not sure that's the same case:). > > > > Just feel that it's better to handle ixgbe_phy_unknown directly > > > > for > > > > some device id as a special case than just replace it to > > > > ixgbe_phy_none to cheat the check path, since that rely on we > > > > never > > > > change the way to handle ixgbe_phy_none. > > > > > > > > So still have the question? > > > > What is the failure if you go with ixgbe_phy_unknown? > > > > Is that possible to work around this like > > > > if (phy_type == ixgbe_phy_unknown && dev_id == xxxx) > > > > ... > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Thanks for having a look at this again. If you could please see > > > the > > > other answer, from myself, I've quoted the exact error we see and > > > the > > > issue it causes. > > > > Yes, I see it failed at eth_ixgbe_dev_init, it will be better if > > you > > can provide more detail for the call stack, so we can figure out if > > we can work around this by handle ixgbe_phy_unknown directly with > > some special case. > > Hi, > > The original problem was found and fixed internally a while ago, so > it's taking some time to get hold of the same hardware again. I hope > to > get back with more details next week, sorry for the delay.
Hi, I had the chance to rebase the application on 18.11 and test again, and it seems like the first patch is no longer necessary. Which is good! Unfortunately I don't have time to bisect and find exactly when it was fixed. I have sent a v4 dropping the first patch. -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
