From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: BCM5461 phy issue in 10M/Full duplex Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 09:53:57 -0700 Message-ID: <45365C25.9070601@hp.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Maciej W. Rozycki" Return-path: Received: from palrel12.hp.com ([156.153.255.237]:55719 "EHLO palrel12.hp.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422684AbWJRQx7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Oct 2006 12:53:59 -0400 To: Kumar Gala In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Kumar Gala wrote: > I was wondering if anyone has had any issues when trying to force a > BCM5461 phy into 10M/full duplex. I seem to be having an issue in the > two managed switches I've tried this on but autoneg to 10/half. This > causes a problem in that I start seeing a large number of frame errors. > > I believe, but need to double check, that if I leave the BCM5461 in > autoneg, and foce the switch to 10M/full that the BCM5461 will autoneg > at 10M/half duplex. Indeed, if one side is hardcoded, autoneg will "fail" and the side trying to autoneg is required by the specs (not that I know chapter and verse to quote from the IEE stuff :( to go into half-duplex. Was 10M/Fullduplex ever standardized? If not I could see where kit might not be willing/able to autoneg to that. > Just wondering if anyone else has seen similar behavior with this PHY. > > thanks > > - kumar > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html