From: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 1/1] ixgbe: force to synchronize reporting "link on" and getting speed and duplex
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 02:54:06 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1450868046.3316.11.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1450853205-27133-1-git-send-email-zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>
On Wed, 2015-12-23 at 14:46 +0800, zyjzyj2000 at gmail.com wrote:
> From: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>
>
> In X540 NIC, there is a time span between reporting "link on" and
> getting the speed and duplex. To a bonding driver in 802.3ad mode,
> this time span will make it not work well if the time span is big
> enough. The big time span will make bonding driver change the state
> of
> the slave device to up while the speed and duplex of the slave device
> can not be gotten. Later the bonding driver will not have change to
> get the speed and duplex of the slave device. The speed and duplex of
> the slave device are important to a bonding driver in 802.3ad mode.
>
> To 82599_SFP NIC and other kinds of NICs, this problem does
> not exist. As such, it is necessary for X540 to report"link on" when
> the link speed is not IXGBE_LINK_SPEED_UNKNOWN.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>
> ---
> ?drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c |???16
> +++++++++++++++-
> ?1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> index aed8d02..cb9d310 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> @@ -6479,7 +6479,21 @@ static void ixgbe_watchdog_link_is_up(struct
> ixgbe_adapter *adapter)
> ? ???????(flow_rx ? "RX" :
> ? ???????(flow_tx ? "TX" : "None"))));
> ?
> - netif_carrier_on(netdev);
> + /*
> + ?* In X540 NIC, there is a time span between reporting "link
> on"
> + ?* and getting the speed and duplex. To a bonding driver in
> 802.3ad
> + ?* mode, this time span will make it not work well if the
> time span
> + ?* is big enough. To 82599_SFP NIC and other kinds of NICs,
> this
> + ?* problem does not exist. As such, it is better for X540 to
> report
> + ?* "link on" when the link speed is not
> IXGBE_LINK_SPEED_UNKNOWN.
> + ?*/
> + if ((hw->mac.type == ixgbe_mac_X540) &&
> + ????(link_speed != IXGBE_LINK_SPEED_UNKNOWN)) {
> + netif_carrier_on(netdev);
> + } else {
> + netif_carrier_on(netdev);
> + }
> +
> ? ixgbe_check_vf_rate_limit(adapter);
> ?
> ? /* enable transmits */
This patch only adds a needless test before
calling?netif_carrier_on(netdev), since the call happens no matter the
branch you take, it appears your running into a timing issue. ?So
adding a wait() before calling?netif_carrier_on(netdev) will accomplish
the same result and you do not have to add a useless test.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/intel-wired-lan/attachments/20151223/f955f020/attachment.asc>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-23 10:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-23 6:46 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 1/1] ixgbe: force to synchronize reporting "link on" and getting speed and duplex zyjzyj2000
2015-12-23 10:54 ` Jeff Kirsher [this message]
2015-12-24 3:12 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [V2 PATCH 1/1] ixgbe: force to synchronize reporting "link on" and zyjzyj2000
2015-12-24 3:12 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 1/1] ixgbe: force to synchronize reporting "link on" and getting speed zyjzyj2000
2015-12-24 5:10 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [V2 PATCH 1/1] ixgbe: force to synchronize reporting "link on" and zhuyj
2015-12-24 6:17 ` Tantilov, Emil S
2015-12-29 2:32 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH V3] ixgbe: force to synchronize link_up and speed as a slave zyjzyj2000
2015-12-29 2:32 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 1/2] ixgbe: force to synchronize reporting "link on" and getting speed zyjzyj2000
2015-12-29 2:32 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 2/2] ixgbe: restrict synchronization of link_up and speed zyjzyj2000
2015-12-29 16:18 ` Tantilov, Emil S
2015-12-29 19:17 ` Rustad, Mark D
2015-12-30 3:06 ` zhuyj
2015-12-30 9:16 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH V4] ixgbe: synchronize the link_speed and link_up of a slave interface zyjzyj2000
2015-12-30 9:16 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 1/3] ixgbe: force to synchronize reporting "link on" and getting speed zyjzyj2000
2015-12-30 9:16 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 2/3] ixgbe: restrict synchronization of link_up and speed zyjzyj2000
2015-12-30 9:16 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 3/3] ixgbe: synchronize the link_speed and link_up of a slave interface zyjzyj2000
2015-12-30 19:02 ` Rustad, Mark D
2015-12-31 5:04 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH V5] ixgbe: synchronize link_up and link_speed of a slave zyjzyj2000
2015-12-31 5:04 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 1/1] ixgbe: synchronize link_up and link_speed of a slave interface zyjzyj2000
2015-12-31 5:37 ` Jeff Kirsher
2015-12-31 7:11 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH V6] ixgbe: synchronize link_up and link_speed of a slave zyjzyj2000
2015-12-31 7:11 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH V6 1/1] ixgbe: synchronize link_up and link_speed of a slave interface zyjzyj2000
2015-12-31 5:17 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH V5] ixgbe: synchronize link_up and link_speed of a slave Jeff Kirsher
2015-12-31 5:24 ` zhuyj
2015-12-30 2:49 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 2/2] ixgbe: restrict synchronization of link_up and speed zhuyj
2015-12-30 6:55 ` Tantilov, Emil S
2015-12-30 8:20 ` zhuyj
2015-12-30 16:37 ` Tantilov, Emil S
2016-01-06 5:41 ` zhuyj
2016-01-06 15:30 ` Tantilov, Emil S
2016-01-07 2:08 ` zhuyj
2016-01-07 2:38 ` zhuyj
2015-12-23 12:17 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 1/1] ixgbe: force to synchronize reporting "link on" and getting speed and duplex Sergei Shtylyov
2015-12-23 15:59 ` Tantilov, Emil S
2015-12-23 18:09 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [E1000-devel] " Stephen Hemminger
2015-12-24 2:27 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " zhuyj
2015-12-24 5:58 ` Tantilov, Emil S
2015-12-24 6:24 ` zhuyj
2015-12-24 14:52 ` Tantilov, Emil S
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1450868046.3316.11.camel@intel.com \
--to=jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox