Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net v2 1/1] e1000e: reconfigure PLL clock gate value and re-enable K1 on Meteor Lake

[Timo Teras <timo.teras@iki.fi>]

Hi

On Wed, 1 Apr 2026 10:07:45 +0300
"Ruinskiy, Dima" <dima.ruinskiy@intel.com> wrote:

> On 25/03/2026 17:49, Ruinskiy, Dima wrote:
> > On 26/02/2026 14:36, Timo Teras wrote:  
> >> Yes, generally maintaining a large quirk set is infeasible.
> >>
> >> But this is my point: if the affected set of machines with this issue
> >> is so large that maintaining a quirk set becomes infeasible, then
> >> the proposed change will make life very difficult for large enough
> >> set of people that a better solution should be devised.
> >>  
> > At this point, with the current PLL change, it looks like the number of 
> > affected systems would be smaller than would be with the previous PLL 
> > value.
> > 
> > So far we have not received additional reports of regressions caused by 
> > this patch, other than yours. So, perhaps, the it can be manageable with 
> > a DMI quirk approach. I went ahead and implemented the infrastructure, 
> > it's actually quite a small change, and does what I want (automatically 
> > alters the default value of the K1 disable flag).

I would not make quick judgement on not receiving any reports that there
is not other hardware where this causes issues. I do hope this is
the situation. But as it happened in the past the reports start typically
with a delay after the commit makes it into an upstream release.

We had the patched kernel with the PLL change running for a bit longer
time, and we observed that it also caused packet loss / very slow network
issues in the Dell laptop. Especially with the later suggested value 0x226.

> > Could you share the DMI IDs of your system, where the issue is observed? 
> > Most likely the sys_vendor, product_family and product_name, located 
> > under /sys/class/dmi/id would be the most useful. I can add them as an 
> > initial DMI table entry for v3 of this patch (or a follow-up patch).

sys_vendor: Dell Inc.
product_family: Dell Pro Laptops
product_name: Dell Pro 16 Plus PB16250

See also the original report for a full dmesg at:
https://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/intel-wired-lan/Week-of-Mon-20250623/048860.html

From dmesg:

DMI: Dell Inc. Dell Pro 16 Plus PB16250/0W8RP8, BIOS 2.3.1 05/16/2025
e1000e 0000:00:1f.6 eth0: MAC: 16, PHY: 12, PBA No: FFFFFF-0FF

I would not be surprised if other Dell models with same chipset are
affected. But this is the only one I have available to test with.

Maybe its worth to check based on sys_vendor and/or product_family
together with the MAC and/or PHY version? That is to exclude product_name?

Thanks!

Timo