> -----Original Message-----
> From: iotg.dpdk.ref....@intel.com <iotg.dpdk.ref....@intel.com>
> Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 4:15 PM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [PATCH] IGC: Remove I225_I_PHY_ID checking
>
> From: NSWE SWS DPDK Dev <iotg.dpdk.ref....@intel.com>
>
> i225 devices have only one PHY vendor. There is unnecessary to check
> _I_PHY_ID during the link establishment and auto-negotiation process, the
> checking also caused devices like i225-IT failed. This patch is to remove the
> mentioned unnecessary checking.
>
> Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
> Signed-off-by: NSWE SWS DPDK Dev <iotg.dpdk.ref....@intel.com>
Is this the expected author name?
> ---
> drivers/net/igc/base/igc_api.c | 1 +
> drivers/net/igc/base/igc_hw.h | 1 +
> drivers/net/igc/base/igc_i225.c | 15 ++-------------
> drivers/net/igc/base/igc_phy.c | 6 ++----
> drivers/net/igc/igc_ethdev.c | 1 +
> 5 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/igc/base/igc_api.c b/drivers/net/igc/base/igc_api.c
> index 9b791dc082..c9fc9ed4b0 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/igc/base/igc_api.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/igc/base/igc_api.c
> @@ -886,6 +886,7 @@ s32 igc_set_mac_type(struct igc_hw *hw)
> case IGC_DEV_ID_I225_V:
> case IGC_DEV_ID_I225_K:
> case IGC_DEV_ID_I225_I:
> + case IGC_DEV_ID_I225_IT:
> case IGC_DEV_ID_I220_V:
> case IGC_DEV_ID_I225_BLANK_NVM:
> case IGC_DEV_ID_I226_K:
> diff --git a/drivers/net/igc/base/igc_hw.h b/drivers/net/igc/base/igc_hw.h
> index 707a1883b4..e919a11c02 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/igc/base/igc_hw.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/igc/base/igc_hw.h
> @@ -164,6 +164,7 @@ struct igc_hw;
> #define IGC_DEV_ID_I225_V 0x15F3
> #define IGC_DEV_ID_I225_K 0x3100
> #define IGC_DEV_ID_I225_I 0x15F8
> +#define IGC_DEV_ID_I225_IT 0x0D9F
The patch's commit log claims to remove something,
but in code it also add some new device ID, could you clarify why we need this
or it should be in a separate patch?
