From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarod Wilson Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] sfc: report supported link speeds on SFP connections Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 09:41:14 -0400 Message-ID: <20160608134114.GJ56933@redhat.com> References: <1464917604-11596-1-git-send-email-jarod@redhat.com> <20160606185529.GV56933@redhat.com> <20160607212016.GH56933@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Solarflare linux maintainers , Edward Cree , David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Bert Kenward Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160607212016.GH56933@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 05:20:16PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 02:55:29PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 05:29:30PM +0100, Bert Kenward wrote: > > > 7000-series SFC NICs connected with an SFP+ module currently fail to > > > report any supported link speeds. > > > > > > Reported-by: Jarod Wilson > > > Signed-off-by: Bert Kenward > > > > Had a feeling my cut might not have been quite right. Looks good to me. > > > > Reviewed-by: Jarod Wilson > > ...however, upon testing, there's a gotcha. This results in my 10Gbps sfc > nic reporting that it supports 40Gbps: > > $ ethtool ens4f0 > Settings for ens4f0: > Supported ports: [ FIBRE ] > Supported link modes: 1000baseT/Full > 10000baseT/Full > 40000baseKR4/Full This turned out to be a flub on my part. My local tree wasn't clean, had some lingering test/debug crap in it that I thought I'd removed, but clearly, hadn't. With that removed, we're all good here. Tested-by: Jarod Wilson -- Jarod Wilson jarod@redhat.com