From: Mark Huth <mhuth@mvista.com>
To: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org>,
Li Yang <leoli@freescale.com>,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ucc_geth: Fix half-duplex operation for non-MII/RMII interfaces
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 22:11:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A4306F2.3070909@mvista.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090624174557.GA31479@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>
Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> Currently the half-duplex operation seems to not work reliably for
> RGMII/GMII PHY interfaces. It takes about 10 minutes to boot NFS
> rootfs using 10/half link, following symptoms were observed:
>
> ucc_geth: QE UCC Gigabit Ethernet Controller
> ucc_geth: UCC1 at 0xe0082000 (irq = 32)
> [...]
> Sending DHCP and RARP requests .
> PHY: mdio@e0082120:07 - Link is Up - 10/Half
> ., OK
So why does the phy think this is a half-duplex network?
> [...]
> Looking up port of RPC 100003/2 on 10.0.0.2
> Looking up port of RPC 100005/1 on 10.0.0.2
> VFS: Mounted root (nfs filesystem) readonly on device 0:13.
> Freeing unused kernel memory: 204k init
> eth0: no IPv6 routers present
> nfs: server 10.0.0.2 not responding, still trying
> nfs: server 10.0.0.2 not responding, still trying
> nfs: server 10.0.0.2 not responding, still trying
> nfs: server 10.0.0.2 OK
> nfs: server 10.0.0.2 OK
> nfs: server 10.0.0.2 not responding, still trying
> [... few minutes of OK/not responding flood ...]
>
> The statistic shows that there are indeed some errors:
>
> # ethtool -S eth0 | grep -v ": 0"
> NIC statistics:
> tx-64-frames: 42
> tx-65-127-frames: 9
> tx-128-255-frames: 4768
> rx-64-frames: 41
> rx-65-127-frames: 260
> rx-128-255-frames: 2679
> tx-bytes-ok: 859634
> tx-multicast-frames: 5
> tx-broadcast-frames: 7
> rx-frames: 8333
> rx-bytes-ok: 8039364
> rx-bytes-all: 8039364
> stats-counter-mask: 4294901760
> tx-single-collision: 324
> tx-multiple-collision: 47
> tx-late-collsion: 604
> tx-aborted-frames: 604
The above two counters are the actual errors from a half-duplex ethernet
configuration. The size of the collision domain is limited so that the
collisions from one end will reach the other end within the minimum
frame length wire time. Thus the collision will be detected within the
first 64 bytes of the frame. A late collision indicates a
mis-configured network. The fact that everything seems to work when the
MAC is placed into full-duplex mode hints that the network is really a
full-duplex network.
Otherwise, if the network is really half-duplex, then presence of a
full-duplex node will result in the other nodes seeing CRC/framing
errors on receive, and possibly also late collisions, as the full-duplex
node does not observe the CS or the CD( carrier sense and collision
detect) part of CSMA/CD, because it doesn't care.
Putting a node in full-duplex will always make the nasty collision
related errors go away, but it may not be a proper diagnosis of the problem.
> tx-frames-ok: 4967
> tx-256-511-frames: 3
> tx-512-1023-frames: 79
> tx-1024-1518-frames: 71
> rx-256-511-frames: 37
> rx-512-1023-frames: 73
> rx-1024-1518-frames: 5243
>
> According to current QEIWRM (Rev. 2 5/2009), FDX bit can be 0 for
> RGMII(10/100) modes, while MPC8568ERM (Rev. C 02/2007) spec says
> that cleared FDX bit is permitted for MII/RMII modes only.
>
> The symptoms above were seen on MPC8569E-MDS boards, so QEIWRM is
> clearly wrong, and this patch completely cures the problems above.
Not so fast - RGMII and GMII refer to the interface between the MAC and
the PHY. While Gigabit physical links will always be full-duplex, phys
that detect lower operational modes will indicate half-duplex where
needed, and putting the MAC into full-duplex will make other nodes see
errors.
As Andy indicated later, it may be necessary to alter the interface
definition in those cases, depending on the particular hardware.
Forcing full-duplex does not seem to be a general solution.
Mark Huth
MontaVista Software
>
> Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/ucc_geth.c | 8 ++++++--
> 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ucc_geth.c b/drivers/net/ucc_geth.c
> index 464df03..e618cf2 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ucc_geth.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ucc_geth.c
> @@ -1469,12 +1469,16 @@ static void adjust_link(struct net_device *dev)
> if (phydev->link) {
> u32 tempval = in_be32(&ug_regs->maccfg2);
> u32 upsmr = in_be32(&uf_regs->upsmr);
> + phy_interface_t phyi = ugeth->phy_interface;
> +
> /* Now we make sure that we can be in full duplex mode.
> * If not, we operate in half-duplex mode. */
> if (phydev->duplex != ugeth->oldduplex) {
> new_state = 1;
> - if (!(phydev->duplex))
> - tempval &= ~(MACCFG2_FDX);
> + if (!phydev->duplex &&
> + (phyi == PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_MII ||
> + phyi == PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_RMII))
> + tempval &= ~MACCFG2_FDX;
> else
> tempval |= MACCFG2_FDX;
> ugeth->oldduplex = phydev->duplex;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-25 5:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-24 17:45 [PATCH] ucc_geth: Fix half-duplex operation for non-MII/RMII interfaces Anton Vorontsov
2009-06-25 5:11 ` Mark Huth [this message]
2009-06-25 7:02 ` Anton Vorontsov
2009-06-25 11:17 ` Anton Vorontsov
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=4A4306F2.3070909@mvista.com \
--to=mhuth@mvista.com \
--cc=avorontsov@ru.mvista.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=galak@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=leoli@freescale.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--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).