Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1412684 > unrolled thread

[PATCH net] ethernet/sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections

Started byJarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
First post2016-06-03 03:40 +0200
Last post2016-06-08 20:20 +0200
Articles 8 — 3 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

Contents

  [PATCH net] ethernet/sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> - 2016-06-03 03:40 +0200
    Re: [PATCH net] ethernet/sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP  connections David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> - 2016-06-04 02:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH net] ethernet/sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP  connections Bert Kenward <bkenward@solarflare.com> - 2016-06-06 17:20 +0200
    [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections Bert Kenward <bkenward@solarflare.com> - 2016-06-06 18:40 +0200
      Re: [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP  connections Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> - 2016-06-06 21:00 +0200
        Re: [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP  connections Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> - 2016-06-07 23:30 +0200
          Re: [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP  connections Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> - 2016-06-08 15:50 +0200
            Re: [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP  connections David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> - 2016-06-08 20:20 +0200

#1412684 — [PATCH net] ethernet/sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections

FromJarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
Date2016-06-03 03:40 +0200
Subject[PATCH net] ethernet/sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections
Message-ID<rFMfD-58M-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
My solarflare cards connected to a 10GbE switch with an SFP+ module/cable
don't currently report any supported link speeds:

$ ethtool ens4f0
Settings for ens4f0:
	Supported ports: [ FIBRE ]
	Supported link modes:   Not reported
	Supported pause frame use: Symmetric Receive-only
	Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
	Advertised link modes:  Not reported
	Advertised pause frame use: Symmetric
	Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
	Link partner advertised link modes:  10000baseKX4/Full
	Link partner advertised pause frame use: Symmetric
	Link partner advertised auto-negotiation: No
	Speed: 10000Mb/s
	Duplex: Full
	Port: FIBRE
	PHYAD: 255
	Transceiver: internal
	Auto-negotiation: on
Cannot get wake-on-lan settings: Operation not permitted
	Current message level: 0x000020f7 (8439)
			       drv probe link ifdown ifup rx_err tx_err hw
	Link detected: yes

I've navigated my way through the sfc code down to mcdi_to_ethtool_cap's
switch on media's MC_CMD_MEDIA_SFP_PLUS case, where no speeds are set.
If we just do some cap checks similar to the MC_CMD_MEDIA_KX4 case, I get
the expected output:

$ ethtool ens4f0
Settings for ens4f0:
	Supported ports: [ FIBRE ]
	Supported link modes:   1000baseKX/Full
	                        10000baseKX4/Full
	Supported pause frame use: Symmetric Receive-only
	Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
	Advertised link modes:  Not reported
	Advertised pause frame use: Symmetric
	Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
	Link partner advertised link modes:  10000baseKX4/Full
	Link partner advertised pause frame use: Symmetric
	Link partner advertised auto-negotiation: No
	Speed: 10000Mb/s
	Duplex: Full
	Port: FIBRE
	PHYAD: 255
	Transceiver: internal
	Auto-negotiation: on
Cannot get wake-on-lan settings: Operation not permitted
	Current message level: 0x000020f7 (8439)
			       drv probe link ifdown ifup rx_err tx_err hw
	Link detected: yes

This is from an sfc9120 interface here. It also applies to a 9140 with a
10GbE breakout cable.

Side note: wiring up Advertised by simply copying Supported seems to be a
thing many other drivers do. Worth doing here?...

CC: Solarflare linux maintainers <linux-net-drivers@solarflare.com>
CC: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
CC: Bert Kenward <bkenward@solarflare.com>
CC: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/mcdi_port.c | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/mcdi_port.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/mcdi_port.c
index 7f295c4..6516471 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/mcdi_port.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/mcdi_port.c
@@ -189,6 +189,10 @@ static u32 mcdi_to_ethtool_cap(u32 media, u32 cap)
 
 	case MC_CMD_MEDIA_XFP:
 	case MC_CMD_MEDIA_SFP_PLUS:
+		if (cap & (1 << MC_CMD_PHY_CAP_1000FDX_LBN))
+			result |= SUPPORTED_1000baseKX_Full;
+		if (cap & (1 << MC_CMD_PHY_CAP_10000FDX_LBN))
+			result |= SUPPORTED_10000baseKX4_Full;
 		result |= SUPPORTED_FIBRE;
 		break;
 
-- 
1.8.3.1

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1413594 — Re: [PATCH net] ethernet/sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections

FromDavid Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Date2016-06-04 02:00 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH net] ethernet/sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections
Message-ID<rG7ap-1iQ-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1412684
From: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
Date: Thu,  2 Jun 2016 21:33:24 -0400

> My solarflare cards connected to a 10GbE switch with an SFP+ module/cable
> don't currently report any supported link speeds:
 ...
> CC: Solarflare linux maintainers <linux-net-drivers@solarflare.com>
> CC: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
> CC: Bert Kenward <bkenward@solarflare.com>
> CC: netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>

Solarflare maintainers, please review.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1415203 — Re: [PATCH net] ethernet/sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections

FromBert Kenward <bkenward@solarflare.com>
Date2016-06-06 17:20 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH net] ethernet/sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections
Message-ID<rH4tP-6DT-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1412684
Apologies for delay in replying.

On 03/06/16 02:33, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> My solarflare cards connected to a 10GbE switch with an SFP+ module/cable
> don't currently report any supported link speeds:
>
> ...
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/mcdi_port.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/mcdi_port.c
> index 7f295c4..6516471 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/mcdi_port.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/mcdi_port.c
> @@ -189,6 +189,10 @@ static u32 mcdi_to_ethtool_cap(u32 media, u32 cap)
>  
>  	case MC_CMD_MEDIA_XFP:
>  	case MC_CMD_MEDIA_SFP_PLUS:
> +		if (cap & (1 << MC_CMD_PHY_CAP_1000FDX_LBN))
> +			result |= SUPPORTED_1000baseKX_Full;
> +		if (cap & (1 << MC_CMD_PHY_CAP_10000FDX_LBN))
> +			result |= SUPPORTED_10000baseKX4_Full;

We probably shouldn't be claiming KX/KX4 here, because it isn't. I'll post an
updated patch shortly.

Bert.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1415277 — [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections

FromBert Kenward <bkenward@solarflare.com>
Date2016-06-06 18:40 +0200
Subject[PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections
Message-ID<rH5Jg-7nV-31@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1412684
7000-series SFC NICs connected with an SFP+ module currently fail to
report any supported link speeds.

Reported-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Bert Kenward <bkenward@solarflare.com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/mcdi_port.c | 7 ++++---
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/mcdi_port.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/mcdi_port.c
index 7f295c4..2a9228a 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/mcdi_port.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/mcdi_port.c
@@ -189,11 +189,12 @@ static u32 mcdi_to_ethtool_cap(u32 media, u32 cap)
 
 	case MC_CMD_MEDIA_XFP:
 	case MC_CMD_MEDIA_SFP_PLUS:
-		result |= SUPPORTED_FIBRE;
-		break;
-
 	case MC_CMD_MEDIA_QSFP_PLUS:
 		result |= SUPPORTED_FIBRE;
+		if (cap & (1 << MC_CMD_PHY_CAP_1000FDX_LBN))
+			result |= SUPPORTED_1000baseT_Full;
+		if (cap & (1 << MC_CMD_PHY_CAP_10000FDX_LBN))
+			result |= SUPPORTED_10000baseT_Full;
 		if (cap & (1 << MC_CMD_PHY_CAP_40000FDX_LBN))
 			result |= SUPPORTED_40000baseCR4_Full;
 		break;
-- 
2.5.5

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1415372 — Re: [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections

FromJarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
Date2016-06-06 21:00 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections
Message-ID<rH7UK-da-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1415277
On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 05:29:30PM +0100, Bert Kenward wrote:
> 7000-series SFC NICs connected with an SFP+ module currently fail to
> report any supported link speeds.
> 
> Reported-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Bert Kenward <bkenward@solarflare.com>

Had a feeling my cut might not have been quite right. Looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod@redhat.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1416646 — Re: [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections

FromJarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
Date2016-06-07 23:30 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections
Message-ID<rHwJs-7Uj-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1415372
On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 02:55:29PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 05:29:30PM +0100, Bert Kenward wrote:
> > 7000-series SFC NICs connected with an SFP+ module currently fail to
> > report any supported link speeds.
> > 
> > Reported-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Bert Kenward <bkenward@solarflare.com>
> 
> Had a feeling my cut might not have been quite right. Looks good to me.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>

...however, upon testing, there's a gotcha. This results in my 10Gbps sfc
nic reporting that it supports 40Gbps:

$ ethtool ens4f0
Settings for ens4f0:
	Supported ports: [ FIBRE ]
	Supported link modes:   1000baseT/Full
	                        10000baseT/Full
	                        40000baseKR4/Full
	Supported pause frame use: Symmetric Receive-only
	Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
	Advertised link modes:  Not reported
	Advertised pause frame use: Symmetric
	Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
	Link partner advertised link modes:  10000baseT/Full
	Link partner advertised pause frame use: Symmetric
	Link partner advertised auto-negotiation: No
	Speed: 10000Mb/s
	Duplex: Full
	Port: FIBRE
	PHYAD: 255
	Transceiver: internal
	Auto-negotiation: on
Cannot get wake-on-lan settings: Operation not permitted
	Current message level: 0x000020f7 (8439)
			       drv probe link ifdown ifup rx_err tx_err hw
	Link detected: yes

$ ethtool -i ens4f0
driver: sfc
version: 4.0
firmware-version: 4.6.1.1001 rx1 tx1
expansion-rom-version:
bus-info: 0000:05:00.0
supports-statistics: yes
supports-test: yes
supports-eeprom-access: no
supports-register-dump: yes
supports-priv-flags: no

$ lspci -v -s 0000:05:00.0
05:00.0 Ethernet controller: Solarflare Communications SFC9120 (rev 01)
	Subsystem: Solarflare Communications SFN7x22F-R2 Flareon Ultra 7000 Series 10G Adapter
	Physical Slot: 4
	Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 16
	I/O ports at c100 [size=256]
	Memory at ef000000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=8M]
	Memory at ef884000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16K]
	Expansion ROM at ef840000 [disabled] [size=256K]
	Capabilities: <access denied>
	Kernel driver in use: sfc

One solution would be to move the case MC_CMD_MEDIA_QSFP_PLUS above
XFP/SFP_PLUS, only check the 40Gbps cap, no break, fall through into the
XFP/SFP_PLUS chunk, continue processing there.

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod@redhat.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1417448 — Re: [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections

FromJarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
Date2016-06-08 15:50 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections
Message-ID<rHM1Q-Pq-35@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1416646
On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 05:20:16PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 02:55:29PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 05:29:30PM +0100, Bert Kenward wrote:
> > > 7000-series SFC NICs connected with an SFP+ module currently fail to
> > > report any supported link speeds.
> > > 
> > > Reported-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Bert Kenward <bkenward@solarflare.com>
> > 
> > Had a feeling my cut might not have been quite right. Looks good to me.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
> 
> ...however, upon testing, there's a gotcha. This results in my 10Gbps sfc
> nic reporting that it supports 40Gbps:
> 
> $ ethtool ens4f0
> Settings for ens4f0:
> 	Supported ports: [ FIBRE ]
> 	Supported link modes:   1000baseT/Full
> 	                        10000baseT/Full
> 	                        40000baseKR4/Full

This turned out to be a flub on my part. My local tree wasn't clean, had
some lingering test/debug crap in it that I thought I'd removed, but
clearly, hadn't. With that removed, we're all good here.

Tested-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod@redhat.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1417747 — Re: [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections

FromDavid Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Date2016-06-08 20:20 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections
Message-ID<rHQf7-3Ci-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1417448
From: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 09:41:14 -0400

> On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 05:20:16PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 02:55:29PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 05:29:30PM +0100, Bert Kenward wrote:
>> > > 7000-series SFC NICs connected with an SFP+ module currently fail to
>> > > report any supported link speeds.
>> > > 
>> > > Reported-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
>> > > Signed-off-by: Bert Kenward <bkenward@solarflare.com>
>> > 
>> > Had a feeling my cut might not have been quite right. Looks good to me.
>> > 
>> > Reviewed-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
>> 
>> ...however, upon testing, there's a gotcha. This results in my 10Gbps sfc
>> nic reporting that it supports 40Gbps:
>> 
>> $ ethtool ens4f0
>> Settings for ens4f0:
>> 	Supported ports: [ FIBRE ]
>> 	Supported link modes:   1000baseT/Full
>> 	                        10000baseT/Full
>> 	                        40000baseKR4/Full
> 
> This turned out to be a flub on my part. My local tree wasn't clean, had
> some lingering test/debug crap in it that I thought I'd removed, but
> clearly, hadn't. With that removed, we're all good here.
> 
> Tested-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>

Thanks for following up.

Applied, thanks everyone.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web