Date:	Wed, 20 Feb 2013 05:39:56 -0800
From:	Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
To:	Stefan Behte <s.behte@...iel.com>
Cc:	"Tantilov, Emil S" <emil.s.tantilov@...el.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Skidmore, Donald C" <donald.c.skidmore@...el.com>,
	"Fujinaka, Todd" <todd.fujinaka@...el.com>,
	"Ronciak, John" <john.ronciak@...el.com>,
	"Boom, Douglas" <douglas.boom@...el.com>
Subject: Re: AW: ixgbe: Regression, unsupported SFP+ modules on 10Gbit/s
 X520 NIC no longer work with allow_unsupported_sfp=1

On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 04:13 -0800, Stefan Behte wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> >I don't think this is a regression since the check you are bypassing with your patch has nothing to do with the unsupported SFP modules lock (this check is few lines below).
> No, that part skipped by the goto.
> 
> >The check you are trying to bypass is actually for supported 1gig SFP module types.
> Actually that's inaccurate: if it's not a compatible module, it's being marked as unsupported. That's the whole purpose of that code.
> 
>                 //if it's not a 10GE Module
>                 if (comp_codes_10g == 0 &&
> 
>                     // and if the current module is NOT compatible (hw->phy.sfp_type must be 9, 10, 11 or 12, see ixgbe_type.h)
>                     !(hw->phy.sfp_type == ixgbe_sfp_type_1g_cu_core1 ||
>                       hw->phy.sfp_type == ixgbe_sfp_type_1g_cu_core0 ||
>                       hw->phy.sfp_type == ixgbe_sfp_type_1g_sx_core0 ||
>                       hw->phy.sfp_type == ixgbe_sfp_type_1g_sx_core1)) {
> 
>                        // then mark hardware as unsupported -> the SFP will not be enabled
>                        // but it should be, if allow_unsupported_sfp=1
>                         hw->phy.type = ixgbe_phy_sfp_unsupported;
>                         status = IXGBE_ERR_SFP_NOT_SUPPORTED;
> 
>                         // skip other stuff, e.g. the checks you mentioned below
>                         goto out;
>                 }
> 
> Ok, my patch is not nice. I've attached one that completely removes the block, as IMHO its only purpose is to lock out non-intel SFPs. Of course I've verified that the code works (at least for me :)).
> 
> >1. What is the SFP+ module you are using (make/model/type)?
> The module is a TP-Link TL-SM311LS 1000BASE-LX LC.
> 
> >2. What is the hw->phy.sfp_type set to (you can add a printk, or if you plug it in after load there should be a "detected SFP+" message in dmesg).
> It's in the log I sent:
> [13920.949008] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: MAC: 2, PHY: 14, SFP+: 65535, PBA No: E68793-005
> So hw->phy.sfp_type is 65535.
> 
> >3. You said that you get the interfaces, but are they operational (link, pass traffic etc)?
> I'm going to run some longterm tests for reliability. But yes, they appear to be working just fine.
> 
> >4. Because you mentioned that this is a regression - was there a previous version of the driver that loads without the unsupported errors with this SFP module?
> Not sure, but as a result of the discussion (http://marc.info/?l=e1000-devel&m=132697406314730&w=2) there was a decision and patch that would allow non-intel SFPs.
> So I don't care too much what we call this - the driver does not work as intended: Intel is preventing use of 3rd-party SFPs.
> 
> So can we please remove this lock-in?
> 
> Best regards,
> Stefan Behte
> 
> --------------------------------------------
> 
> Stefan Behte
> Teamleiter Systemadministration
> 
> Babiel GmbH
> Erkrather Str. 224a
> D-40233 Düsseldorf
> 
> Tel: 0211-179349 0
> Fax: 0211-179349 29
> E-Mail: s.behte@...iel.com
> Internet: http://www.babiel.com
> 
> Geschäftsführer: Georg Babiel, Dr. Rainer Babiel, Harald Babiel Amtsgericht Düsseldorf HRB 38633
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ DISCLAIMER ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> The information transmitted in this electronic mail message may contain confidential and or privileged materials. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you receive such e-mails in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
> 
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Tantilov, Emil S [mailto:emil.s.tantilov@...el.com]
> Gesendet: Freitag, 15. Februar 2013 21:14
> An: Stefan Behte; netdev@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: Skidmore, Donald C; Kirsher, Jeffrey T; Fujinaka, Todd; Ronciak, John
> Betreff: RE: ixgbe: Regression, unsupported SFP+ modules on 10Gbit/s X520 NIC no longer work with allow_unsupported_sfp=1
> 
> Stefan,
> 
> I don't think this is a regression since the check you are bypassing with your patch has nothing to do with the unsupported SFP modules lock (this check is few lines below). The check you are trying to bypass is actually for supported 1gig SFP module types. Could you provide some additional information about your setup?
> 
> 1. What is the SFP+ module you are using (make/model/type)?
> 2. What is the hw->phy.sfp_type set to (you can add a printk, or if you plug it in after load there should be a "detected SFP+" message in dmesg).
> 3. You said that you get the interfaces, but are they operational (link, pass traffic etc)?
> 4. Because you mentioned that this is a regression - was there a previous version of the driver that loads without the unsupported errors with this SFP module?
> 
> Thanks,
> Emil
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org] On
> >Behalf Of Stefan Behte
> >Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 4:58 PM
> >To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
> >Subject: ixgbe: Regression, unsupported SFP+ modules on 10Gbit/s X520 NIC
> >no longer work with allow_unsupported_sfp=1
> >
> >Hello,
> >
> >I was told to send a mail, even though I had already opened
> >https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53901.
> >
> >Someone patched the ixgbe driver, and now non-intel SFPs do not work
> >anymore, again. The issue of intel "lock-in" was discussed before here:
> >http://marc.info/?l=e1000-devel&m=132697406314730&w=2
> >
> >A tested patch is attached.
> >
> >Here is what I do:
> >
> ># modinfo ixgbe | grep parm
> >parm:           max_vfs:Maximum number of virtual functions to allocate per
> >physical function - default is zero and maximum value is 63 (uint)
> >parm:           allow_unsupported_sfp:Allow unsupported and untested SFP+
> >modules on 82599-based adapters (uint)
> >parm:           debug:Debug level (0=none,...,16=all) (int)
> >
> ># modprobe -r ixgbe
> ># modprobe ixgbe allow_unsupported_sfp=0
> ># dmesg | grep ixgbe
> >[13690.355090] ixgbe: Intel(R) 10 Gigabit PCI Express Network Driver -
> >version 3.9.15-k
> >[13690.355092] ixgbe: Copyright (c) 1999-2012 Intel Corporation.
> >[13690.373128] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: failed to load because an unsupported
> >SFP+ module type was detected.
> >[13690.373177] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: Reload the driver after installing a
> >supported module.
> >[13690.390987] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: failed to load because an unsupported
> >SFP+ module type was detected.
> >[13690.391036] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: Reload the driver after installing a
> >supported module.
> >
> ># modprobe -r ixgbe
> ># modprobe ixgbe allow_unsupported_sfp=1
> ># dmesg | grep ixgbe
> >[13679.088849] dca service started, version 1.12.1
> >[13679.091174] ixgbe: Intel(R) 10 Gigabit PCI Express Network Driver -
> >version 3.9.15-k
> >[13679.091177] ixgbe: Copyright (c) 1999-2012 Intel Corporation.
> >[13679.109194] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: failed to load because an unsupported
> >SFP+ module type was detected.
> >[13679.109243] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: Reload the driver after installing a
> >supported module.
> >[13679.127399] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: failed to load because an unsupported
> >SFP+ module type was detected.
> >[13679.127450] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: Reload the driver after installing a
> >supported module.
> >[13690.352712] dca service started, version 1.12.1
> >
> >
> >With the patch:
> >
> ># modprobe -r ixgbe
> ># modprobe ixgbe allow_unsupported_sfp=0
> ># dmesg | grep ixgbe
> >[13907.870087] ixgbe: Intel(R) 10 Gigabit PCI Express Network Driver -
> >version 3.9.15-k
> >[13907.870089] ixgbe: Copyright (c) 1999-2012 Intel Corporation.
> >[13907.888106] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: failed to load because an unsupported
> >SFP+ module type was detected.
> >[13907.888155] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: Reload the driver after installing a
> >supported module.
> >[13907.906187] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: failed to load because an unsupported
> >SFP+ module type was detected.
> >[13907.906237] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: Reload the driver after installing a
> >supported module.
> >
> >
> ># modprobe -r ixgbe
> ># modprobe ixgbe allow_unsupported_sfp=1
> ># dmesg | grep ixgbe
> >[13914.534758] ixgbe: Intel(R) 10 Gigabit PCI Express Network Driver -
> >version3.9.15-k
> >[13914.534761] ixgbe: Copyright (c) 1999-2012 Intel Corporation.
> >[13914.552820] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0 (unregistered net_device): WARNING: Intel
> >(R) Network Connections are quality tested using Intel (R) Ethernet Optics.
> >Using untested modules is not supported and may cause unstable operation or
> >damage to
> >the module or the adapter.  Intel Corporation is not responsible for any
> >harm caused by using untested modules.
> >[13917.741931] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: irq 50 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13917.741938] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: irq 51 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13917.741942] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: irq 52 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13917.741951] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: irq 53 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13917.741955] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: irq 54 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13917.741960] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: irq 55 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13917.741965] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: irq 56 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13917.741969] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: irq 57 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13917.741973] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: irq 58 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13917.742002] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: Multiqueue Enabled: Rx Queue count = 8,
> >Tx Queue count = 8
> >[13917.742126] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: (PCI Express:5.0GT/s:Width x8)
> >90:e2:ba:37:3b:18
> >[13917.742207] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: MAC: 2, PHY: 14, SFP+: 65535, PBA No:
> >E68793-005
> >[13917.743461] ixgbe 0000:02:00.0: Intel(R) 10 Gigabit Network Connection
> >[13917.761578] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1 (unregistered net_device): WARNING: Intel
> >(R) Network Connections are quality tested using Intel (R) Ethernet Optics.
> >Using untested modules is not supported and may cause unstable operation or
> >damage to the module or the adapter.  Intel Corporation is not responsible
> >for any harm caused by using untested modules.
> >[13920.948726] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: irq 59 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13920.948737] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: irq 60 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13920.948742] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: irq 61 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13920.948746] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: irq 62 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13920.948751] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: irq 63 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13920.948757] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: irq 64 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13920.948761] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: irq 65 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13920.948767] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: irq 66 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13920.948774] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: irq 67 for MSI/MSI-X
> >[13920.948803] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: Multiqueue Enabled: Rx Queue count = 8,
> >Tx Queue count = 8
> >[13920.948927] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: (PCI Express:5.0GT/s:Width x8)
> >90:e2:ba:37:3b:19
> >[13920.949008] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: MAC: 2, PHY: 14, SFP+: 65535, PBA No:
> >E68793-005
> >[13920.950237] ixgbe 0000:02:00.1: Intel(R) 10 Gigabit Network Connection
> >
> >And then I get two nice Interfaces. Please apply. :)
> >
> >
> >Best regards,
> >
> >Stefan Behte
> >

Stefan,

We are currently working on the resolution to your issue.  I have also
added your patch to my queue of ixgbe patches.

Cheers,
Jeff

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists