From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: i40e_aq_get_phy_capabilities() fails when using SFP+
 with no link
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 14:55:54 +0100
Message-ID: <20170112145554.44506d05@glumotte.dev.6wind.com>
References: <2BF7FCC7-B2DF-43EE-B5F8-2F3271FB3DA1@gmail.com>
 <20170110162849.2256dc6e@glumotte.dev.6wind.com>
 <F35DEAC7BCE34641BA9FAC6BCA4A12E71A98F8FE@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <1A089981-6412-47FD-A46A-95A958D5E206@gmail.com>
 <FC7A99FCE8F15942AB8D6F91FF66D8F694836A60@ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Christos Ricudis <ricudis.christos@gmail.com>, "Zhang, Helin"
 <helin.zhang@intel.com>, Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
 "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>
To: "Rowden, Aaron F" <aaron.f.rowden@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f47.google.com (mail-wm0-f47.google.com [74.125.82.47])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACF6D5424
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 14:56:02 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wm0-f47.google.com with SMTP id c206so20943614wme.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 05:56:02 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <FC7A99FCE8F15942AB8D6F91FF66D8F694836A60@ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

Hi,

On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 20:51:58 +0000, "Rowden, Aaron F"
<aaron.f.rowden@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Helin,
>=20
> I'm checking on this to see why it could be failing but I don=E2=80=99t t=
hink
> this is one part of formal validation. Intel modules are always what
> is recommended.
>=20
> Aaron
>=20
> > Hi Helin,=20
> >=20
> > > On 11 Jan 2017, at 09:08, Zhang, Helin <helin.zhang@intel.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >=20
> > > Hi Aaron
> > >=20
> > > Is the SFP+ (Finisar FTLX8571D3BCL) supported and validated by
> > > Intel? It seems there is some PHY issue in this case. =20
> >=20
> > As the original reporter of this issue, I will test with validated
> > SFP+s and will report on my testing.=20
> >=20
> > Shouldn=E2=80=99t unsupported SFP+s be blacklisted in the I40E driver?=
=20
> >=20

Just to let you know that in my case the SFP are Intel ones.
Maybe it's a different issue.

I see there are some i40e fixes in the net-next repo, I'll give a try
with this version.

Regards,
Olivier