From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Greear Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] ixgbe: Unsupported SFP+ modules on 10Gbit/s X520-DA2 NIC? Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 14:40:47 -0800 Message-ID: <4F174A6F.8050002@candelatech.com> References: <1326886258.19261.25.camel@probook> <20120118091351.000052fc@unknown> <9B4A1B1917080E46B64F07F2989DADD621FC38@ORSMSX102.amr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Benny Amorsen , "Brandeburg, Jesse" , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , "e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" To: "Fujinaka, Todd" Return-path: Received: from mail.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.172]:38287 "EHLO ns3.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755068Ab2ARWlK (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:41:10 -0500 In-Reply-To: <9B4A1B1917080E46B64F07F2989DADD621FC38@ORSMSX102.amr.corp.intel.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 01/18/2012 02:21 PM, Fujinaka, Todd wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: Benny Amorsen [mailto:benny+usenet@amorsen.dk] > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 1:45 PM > To: Brandeburg, Jesse > Cc: Jesper Dangaard Brouer; e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; netdev@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] ixgbe: Unsupported SFP+ modules on 10Gbit/s X520-DA2 NIC? > > Jesse Brandeburg writes: > >> For X520 adapters, the documentation[1] states that which SFP+ >> adapters are/are not supported. Direct attach cables are also >> supported. >> >> [1] >> http://www.intel.com/support/network/adapter/pro100/sb/CS-030612.htm > > I can't believe that locked optics have now arrived on commodity hardware. I have been trying to migrate to all-Intel networking at work; that effort is certainly on hold now. > > > That's up to you. There's "locked" and there's "locked". I'm surprised > that Benny and Jesper haven't looked at the driver to see where the > messages come from. As a datapoint: We had a customer trying to use a non-supported SFP+ module in an 82599 NIC, and they hacked the driver to over-rule the exclusion. It sort of worked for them, but never well, and never at any decent throughput. Now, I have no idea if their SFP+ was decent or not, but at least in some cases, just over-riding the driver doesn't fix things. It does seem like Intel could offer a module option to easily over-ride the SFP+ exclusion for folks that wanted to test new SFP+ modules for them, however. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com