From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [net-2.6 PATCH 2/4] ixgbe: fix regression on some 82598 adapters Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 19:12:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20090703.191211.185827358.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20090702225012.22746.57218.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20090702225031.22746.74206.stgit@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, gospo@redhat.com, peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@intel.com, donald.c.skidmore@intel.com To: jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:36291 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757062AbZGDCMF (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2009 22:12:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090702225031.22746.74206.stgit@localhost.localdomain> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Jeff Kirsher Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 15:50:31 -0700 > From: Don Skidmore > > The change to check the SFP+ module again on open() was > causing the XFP (non-SFP+) adapters to be rejected. We > only want to try and re-identify the SFP+ module if the > original probe found that this device was an SFP+ device. > So for this code path (driver loaded with SFP module, module > inserted, ifconfig up of the device) the type will be > ixgbe_phy_unknown for an unidentified SFP+ module. So we > only check if that is the case. > > This problem also shows up on Copper devices. > > Signed-off-by: Peter P Waskiewicz Jr > Signed-off-by: Don Skidmore > Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher Applied.