netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next 2/2] ice: add support for Auto FEC with FEC disabled via ETHTOOL

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CO1PR11MB5089AEF6A98652B577A109B1D6739@CO1PR11MB5089.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Aug 2022 23:13:47 +0000
From:   "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Greenwalt, Paul" <paul.greenwalt@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 2/2] ice: add support for Auto FEC with FEC
 disabled via ETHTOOL_SFECPARAM



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2022 4:03 PM
> To: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; Greenwalt, Paul <paul.greenwalt@...el.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] ice: add support for Auto FEC with FEC disabled
> via ETHTOOL_SFECPARAM
> 
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 22:53:44 +0000 Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> > > On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 21:29:31 +0000 Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> > > > Ok I got information from the other folks here. LESM is not a
> > > > standard its just the name we used internally for how the firmware
> > > > establishes link. I'll rephrase this whole section and clarify it.
> > >
> > > Hold up, I'm pretty sure this is in the standard.
> >
> > According to the folks I talked to what we have here, we didn't
> > understand this as being from a standard, but if it is I'd love to
> > read on it.
> 
> Table 110C–1—Host and cable assembly combinations
> in IEEE 802.3 2018, that's what I was thinking of.

Ah. I am not sure if the state machine in firmware uses this table or not, but my guess is that it does.

Thanks,
Jake