netdev - Re: [net-next PATCH v3 11/15] eth: fbnic: Add link detection

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: <281cdc6a-635f-499d-a312-9c7d8bb949f1@lunn.ch>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2024 21:33:14 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
Cc: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Alexander Duyck <alexanderduyck@...com>, kuba@...nel.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
	kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v3 11/15] eth: fbnic: Add link detection

> I was actually going to reach out to you guys about that. For this
> patch set I think it may be needed as I have no way to sort out
> 50000baseCR2 (NRZ, 2 lanes) vs 50000baseCR (PAM4, 1 lane) in the
> current phylink code for setting the mac link up. I was wondering if
> you had any suggestions on how I might resolve that?
> 
> Basically I have a laundry list of things that I was planning to start
> on in the follow on sets:
> 
> 1. I still need to add CGMII support as technically we are using a
> different interface mode to support 100Gbps. Seems like I can mostly
> just do a find/insert based on the PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_XLGMII to add
> that so it should be straight forward.
> 
> 2. We have 2 PCS blocks we are working with to set up the CR2 modes. I
> was wondering if I should just be writing my PCS code to be handling
> the merged pair of IP or if I should look at changing the phylink code
> to support more than one PCS device servicing a given connection?
> 
> 3. The FEC config is integral to the PCS and MAC setup on my device. I
> was wondering why FEC isn't included as a part of the phylink code?
> Are there any plans to look at doing that? Otherwise what is the
> recommended setup for handling that as it can be negotiated via
> autoneg for our 25G and 50G-R2 links so I will need to work out how to
> best go after that.

You are pushing the envelope for current phylink. So far, i don't
think it has been used for anything more than 10G. Although 10GBase-KR
does have FEC, nobody has needed it yet. So this is something you
should extend phylink with.

As for multiple PCS for one connection, is this common, or special to
your hardware?

     Andrew