On 12/23/2015 11:59 PM, Tantilov, Emil S wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:intel-wired-lan-boun...@lists.osuosl.org] On
Behalf Of zyjzyj2...@gmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 10:47 PM
To: Kirsher, Jeffrey T; Brandeburg, Jesse; Nelson, Shannon; Wyborny,
Carolyn; Skidmore, Donald C; Allan, Bruce W; Ronciak, John; Williams, Mitch
A; intel-wired-...@lists.osuosl.org; netdev@vger.kernel.org; e1000-
de...@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: Viswanathan, Ven (Wind River); Shteinbock, Boris (Wind River); Bourg,
Vincent (Wind River)
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 1/1] ixgbe: force to synchronize
reporting "link on" and getting speed and duplex
From: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2...@gmail.com>
In X540 NIC, there is a time span between reporting "link on" and
getting the speed and duplex. To a bonding driver in 802.3ad mode,
this time span will make it not work well if the time span is big
enough. The big time span will make bonding driver change the state of
the slave device to up while the speed and duplex of the slave device
can not be gotten. Later the bonding driver will not have change to
get the speed and duplex of the slave device. The speed and duplex of
the slave device are important to a bonding driver in 802.3ad mode.
To 82599_SFP NIC and other kinds of NICs, this problem does
not exist. As such, it is necessary for X540 to report"link on" when
the link speed is not IXGBE_LINK_SPEED_UNKNOWN.
Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2...@gmail.com>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
index aed8d02..cb9d310 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
@@ -6479,7 +6479,21 @@ static void ixgbe_watchdog_link_is_up(struct
ixgbe_adapter *adapter)
(flow_rx ? "RX" :
(flow_tx ? "TX" : "None"))));
- netif_carrier_on(netdev);
+ /*
+ * In X540 NIC, there is a time span between reporting "link on"
+ * and getting the speed and duplex. To a bonding driver in 802.3ad
+ * mode, this time span will make it not work well if the time span
+ * is big enough. To 82599_SFP NIC and other kinds of NICs, this
+ * problem does not exist. As such, it is better for X540 to report
+ * "link on" when the link speed is not IXGBE_LINK_SPEED_UNKNOWN.
+ */
+ if ((hw->mac.type == ixgbe_mac_X540) &&
+ (link_speed != IXGBE_LINK_SPEED_UNKNOWN)) {
+ netif_carrier_on(netdev);
+ } else {
+ netif_carrier_on(netdev);
+ }
+
ixgbe_check_vf_rate_limit(adapter);
/* enable transmits */
--
1.7.9.5
NAK
I have already submitted a patch that will address the issue with bonding
reporting
unknown speed (in /proc/bonding/bondX) after the link is established due to
link flaps:
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/552485/
The bonding driver gets the speed from ethtool and this is where the reporting
needs
to be fixed. The issue is that the bonding driver polls for netif_carrier_ok()
at a
certain rate and as such will not be able to detect rapid link changes.
Thanks for your reply. The root cause is different from my problem. My
problem is that
"link up" is prior to "speed and duplex". That is, the physical NIC
reports "link up" while
the speed is unknown at the same time. We can run "ethtool ethx" to
confirm it.
Any way, thanks a lot.
Zhu Yanjun
If there is a case where link_speed is unknown when entering this function it's
probably
better to just bail rather than have this hack around the netif_carrier_on()
especially
after the driver already reported link status change. Rapid link changes can
occur between
link partners and not just for X540.
Thanks,
Emil
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
