netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@comx.dk>
To: Benny Amorsen <benny+usenet@amorsen.dk>
Cc: "e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: ixgbe: Unsupported SFP+ modules on 10Gbit/s X520-DA2 NIC?
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 23:19:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1326925160.2795.45.camel@probook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3d3ag7ki8.fsf@ursa.amorsen.dk>

On Wed, 2012-01-18 at 22:45 +0100, Benny Amorsen wrote:
> Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com> writes:
> 
> > For X520 adapters, the documentation[1] states that which SFP+
> > adapters are/are not supported.  Direct attach cables are also
> > supported.
> >
> > [1] http://www.intel.com/support/network/adapter/pro100/sb/CS-030612.htm
> 
> I can't believe that locked optics have now arrived on commodity
> hardware. I have been trying to migrate to all-Intel networking at work;
> that effort is certainly on hold now.

I cannot understand why Intel are pulling a stunt like this! :-(

I have read the code, and the limitation comes from a EEPROM setting on
the NIC, see define "IXGBE_DEVICE_CAPS_ALLOW_ANY_SFP 0x1".

Here is a (untested) patch I believe removes the limitation in the
driver:


[PATCH] ixgbe: Always allow any SFP+ regardless of EEPROM setting.

Intel are trying to limit which SFP's we can use in our NICs.
We don't like this practices in the Linux Kernel.

Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@comx.dk>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_phy.c |    2 ++
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_phy.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_phy.c
index 7cf1e1f..2b13083 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_phy.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_phy.c
@@ -1061,6 +1061,8 @@ s32 ixgbe_identify_sfp_module_generic(struct ixgbe_hw *hw)
 		}
 
 		hw->mac.ops.get_device_caps(hw, &enforce_sfp);
+		/* Hack: Always allow any SFP regardless of EEPROM setting */
+		enforce_sfp |= IXGBE_DEVICE_CAPS_ALLOW_ANY_SFP;
 		if (!(enforce_sfp & IXGBE_DEVICE_CAPS_ALLOW_ANY_SFP) &&
 		    !((hw->phy.sfp_type == ixgbe_sfp_type_1g_cu_core0) ||
 		      (hw->phy.sfp_type == ixgbe_sfp_type_1g_cu_core1))) {



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
_______________________________________________
E1000-devel mailing list
E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel
To learn more about Intel&#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired

  reply	other threads:[~2012-01-18 22:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-01-18 11:30 ixgbe: Unsupported SFP+ modules on 10Gbit/s X520-DA2 NIC? Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2012-01-18 17:13 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2012-01-18 20:00   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2012-01-18 21:45   ` Benny Amorsen
2012-01-18 22:19     ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
2012-01-18 22:43       ` Ben Greear
2012-01-19 14:46       ` [PATCH RFC] ixgbe: Module param "allow_any_sfp" for allowing unsupported SFP+ modules Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2012-01-20  1:12         ` Jeff Kirsher
2012-01-18 22:21     ` [E1000-devel] ixgbe: Unsupported SFP+ modules on 10Gbit/s X520-DA2 NIC? Fujinaka, Todd
2012-01-18 22:40       ` Ben Greear
2012-01-19 11:50         ` David Lamparter
2012-01-19  1:12       ` [E1000-devel] " Chuck Anderson
2012-01-19  2:55         ` Simon Chen

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=1326925160.2795.45.camel@probook \
    --to=hawk@comx.dk \
    --cc=benny+usenet@amorsen.dk \
    --cc=e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).