From: patric <pakar@imperialnet.org>
To: Michael Chan <mchan@broadcom.com>
Cc: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: tg3 issues
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 18:59:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46A0E9D7.7020904@imperialnet.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1184866465.10854.45.camel@dell>
Michael Chan wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 15:24 +0200, patric wrote:
>
>
>> Just a hypothetical question. If the 2 network cards starts the
>> autonegotiation would it be possible that they get into a loop where
>> they are chasing each others state? Maybe a fix could be to add a sleep
>> of a random length that would enable them to catch up? Maybe you know if
>> any of the fiber-cards so support running without flowcontrol too since
>> the cards don't seem to be able to get a link with flowcontrol turned
>> off at least in this setup.
>>
>>
>>
>
> The old 5701 fiber NICs do not support autonegotiation in hardware so it
> is done "by hand" in the driver. It is not the most robust way of doing
> autoneg and what you described is totally possible. You might want to
> try disabling autoneg to see if it works any better. There is only one
> possible speed in fiber and autoneg is really only used to negotiate
> flow control. Some switch ports will not link up if the link partner
> does not do autoneg though.
>
> You have to use ethtool in initrd to turn off autoneg or just modify the
> driver to disable autoneg.
>
>
>
Thanks... That's a confirmation on what i suspected.. I think i'll dig
into the code instead and try to figure out some way of making it work a
bit better for my setup atleast...
I'll post a patch later if i get something working... Btw, do you have
any timings on how long it takes for the cards to get a lock on the link?
Thanks for your input!
/Patric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-20 16:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <469E78A2.80904@imperialnet.org>
2007-07-19 11:19 ` tg3 issues pradeep singh
2007-07-19 11:37 ` Neil Horman
2007-07-19 13:24 ` patric
2007-07-19 17:34 ` Michael Chan
2007-07-20 16:59 ` patric [this message]
2007-07-20 19:34 ` Michael Chan
2007-07-20 19:57 ` patric
2007-07-22 11:43 ` patric
2007-07-23 21:34 ` Michael Chan
2007-07-24 7:33 ` patric
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=46A0E9D7.7020904@imperialnet.org \
--to=pakar@imperialnet.org \
--cc=mchan@broadcom.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
/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).