On 7/18/2017 3:56 PM, Dai, Wei wrote: > HI, Srini > > Sorry for late response. > > As I have pointed out that Ixgbe_reset_hw_82599( ) calls hw->phy.ops.init(hw) > unconditionally, > I think it is no need to call hw->phy.ops.init(hw) after > ixgbe_pf_reset_hw(hw) at least for 82599. > I also think that only moving "hw->phy.type = ixgbe_phy_unknown" just before > ixgbe_pf_reset_hw(hw) is OK. > > What's more, how about X540 and X550 ? > I have just got a X540 and a X550 NIC with copper interface, so I only can > plug in/out the RJ45 line to help test it. > > Is your patch designed for plugging out original SFP and then plugging in > another different type of SFP ? > > By the way, I'd like you provide more details on how to test your patch? With > testpmd ? Or other app ?
This is an old patch, with no update for a while. If this is still needed please shout, otherwise patch will be removed. Thanks, ferruh > > Thanks > -Wei > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Yigit, Ferruh >> Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 9:00 PM >> To: Srinivasan J <srinid...@gmail.com>; Dai, Wei <wei....@intel.com> >> Cc: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>; dev@dpdk.org; Lu, >> Wenzhuo <wenzhuo...@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin >> <konstantin.anan...@intel.com> >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: support detection of hot >> swapped SFP/SFP+ >> >> On 5/19/2017 11:04 AM, Srinivasan J wrote: >>> Hi Wei, >>> Yes the changes are in ixgbe_dev_start( ), the patch shows >>> the function as eth_ixgbevf_pci_remove() probably due to the way diff >>> recognizes the change. I have tested the change using Intel >>> Corporation 82599ES. >> >> Hi Srinivasan, Wei, >> >> What is the latest status of the patch? Are all issues pointed by Wie >> addressed in the patch, or are we waiting for a new version? >> >> Thanks, >> ferruh >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Srini >>> >>> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Dai, Wei <wei....@intel.com> wrote: >>>> Hi, Srini >>>> >>>> There is a bit confusion. Your patch shows that your code is added into >> the function eth_ixgbevf_pci_remove( ). >>>> But it is not. It is added into the fucntion ixgbe_dev_start( ), right ? >>>> So would you please rebase it to R 17.05 ? >>>> >>>> Which type of ixgbe device id did you tested ? >>>> >>>> There are many MAC types with different device id. >>>> >>>> The function ixgbe_pf_reset_hw(hw) is called before your adding code. >>>> ixgbe_pf_reset_hw() calls hw->mac.ops.reset_hw( ) which may points to >> following different function for different MAC type. >>>> Ixgbe_reset_hw_82598( ) calls hw->phy.ops.init(hw) if >> hw->phy.reset_disable == false . >>>> Ixgbe_reset_hw_82599( ) calls hw->phy.ops.init(hw) unconditionally. >>>> ixgbe_reset_hw_X540( ) doesn't' call pw->phy.ops.init(hw). For X540, >> hw->phy.ops.init points to ixgbe_init_phy_ops_generic() which only initialize >> some function pointers. >>>> Ixgbe_rest_hw_x550em() calls hw->phy.ops.init(hw) unconditionally. >>>> >>>> And for VF, ixgbe_reset_hw_vf( ) and ixgbevf_hv_reset_hw_vf( ) don't >> call hw->phy.ops.init(hw) anywhere. >>>> >>>> Thanks & Best Regards >>>> -Wei >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas >> Monjalon >>>>> Sent: Sunday, May 7, 2017 6:36 AM >>>>> To: Srinivasan J <srinid...@gmail.com> >>>>> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo...@intel.com>; Ananyev, >>>>> Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com> >>>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: support detection of hot >>>>> swapped SFP/SFP+ >>>>> >>>>> 06/05/2017 15:51, Srinivasan J: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> Do we need an explicit "Acked-by" keyword for >>>>>> this patch to be accepted and applied? >>>>> >>>>> Yes, given it is not a trivial patch, an ack from the maintainer is >>>>> required. >>>>> Anyway, it has been submitted too late for 17.05 testing. >
