> -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Daly <je...@silicom-usa.com> > Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2022 23:12 > To: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>; Wang, Haiyue > <haiyue.w...@intel.com> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; Mcnamara, John > <john.mcnam...@intel.com> > Subject: RE: [PATCH] net/ixgbe: Treat 1G Cu SFPs as 1G SX on the X550 devices > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > > Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2022 8:19 AM > > To: Wang, Haiyue <haiyue.w...@intel.com> > > Cc: Jeff Daly <je...@silicom-usa.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Stephen Douthit > > <steph...@silicom-usa.com>; qi.z.zh...@intel.com; > > john.mcnam...@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 <tho...@monjalon.net> > > > > 14/04/2022 03:31, Wang, Haiyue: > > > > > From: je...@silicom-usa.com <je...@silicom-usa.com> > > > > > > From: Stephen Douthit <steph...@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 <steph...@silicom-usa.com> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Daly <je...@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?
Correct, let's get more reviews in IWL. https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/intel-wired-lan/patch/20220414201329.27714-1-je...@silicom-usa.com/ >
