[Intel-wired-lan] ixgbe driver - Link Modes

[Intel-wired-lan] ixgbe driver - Link Modes

[Peter Bergin]

Hi,

I'm currently working with a kernel upgrade in a system using Intel 
82599EB 10Gb NIC. The kernel will be changed from version 3.4 to 4.1. 
When looking into the details with 'ethtool' I see a difference in the 
'Supported link modes:' and 'Advertised link modes:' fields between the 
kernels on same hardware. Can anyone help me understand this difference 
and if it is critical or not?

Thanks,
/Peter

With kernel 3.4:

~ # ethtool eth6
Settings for eth6:
Supported ports: [ FIBRE ]
*Supported link modes: 1000baseT/Full**
**10000baseT/Full*
Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
*Advertised link modes: 1000baseT/Full**
**10000baseT/Full*
Advertised pause frame use: No
Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
Speed: 10000Mb/s
Duplex: Full
Port: Other
PHYAD: 0
Transceiver: external
Auto-negotiation: on
Supports Wake-on: umbg
Wake-on: g
Current message level: 0x00000007 (7)
drv probe link
Link detected: yes

~ # ethtool -i eth6
driver: ixgbe
version: 3.8.21-k
firmware-version: 0x800000c9
bus-info: 0000:05:00.1



With kernel 4.1:

~ # ethtool eth6
Settings for eth6:
Supported ports: [ FIBRE ]
*Supported link modes: 1000baseT/Full*
Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
*Advertised link modes: 1000baseT/Full**
*Advertised pause frame use: No
Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
Speed: 10000Mb/s
Duplex: Full
Port: Other
PHYAD: 0
Transceiver: external
Auto-negotiation: on
Supports Wake-on: umbg
Wake-on: g
Current message level: 0x00000007 (7)
drv probe link
Link detected: yes

~ # ethtool -i eth6
driver: ixgbe
version: 4.4.0-k
firmware-version: 0x800000c9
bus-info: 0000:05:00.1


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/intel-wired-lan/attachments/20171215/57f90ce3/attachment.html>

[Intel-wired-lan] ixgbe driver - Link Modes

[Alexander Duyck]

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 5:31 AM, Peter Bergin <peter@berginkonsult.se> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently working with a kernel upgrade in a system using Intel 82599EB
> 10Gb NIC. The kernel will be changed from version 3.4 to 4.1. When looking
> into the details with 'ethtool' I see a difference in the 'Supported link
> modes:' and 'Advertised link modes:' fields between the kernels on same
> hardware. Can anyone help me understand this difference and if it is
> critical or not?
>
> Thanks,
> /Peter
>
> With kernel 3.4:
>
> ~ # ethtool eth6
> Settings for eth6:
> Supported ports: [ FIBRE ]
> Supported link modes: 1000baseT/Full
> 10000baseT/Full
> Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
> Advertised link modes: 1000baseT/Full
> 10000baseT/Full
> Advertised pause frame use: No
> Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
> Speed: 10000Mb/s
> Duplex: Full
> Port: Other
> PHYAD: 0
> Transceiver: external
> Auto-negotiation: on
> Supports Wake-on: umbg
> Wake-on: g
> Current message level: 0x00000007 (7)
> drv probe link
> Link detected: yes
>
> ~ # ethtool -i eth6
> driver: ixgbe
> version: 3.8.21-k
> firmware-version: 0x800000c9
> bus-info: 0000:05:00.1
>
>
>
> With kernel 4.1:
>
> ~ # ethtool eth6
> Settings for eth6:
> Supported ports: [ FIBRE ]
> Supported link modes: 1000baseT/Full
> Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
> Advertised link modes: 1000baseT/Full
> Advertised pause frame use: No
> Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
> Speed: 10000Mb/s
> Duplex: Full
> Port: Other
> PHYAD: 0
> Transceiver: external
> Auto-negotiation: on
> Supports Wake-on: umbg
> Wake-on: g
> Current message level: 0x00000007 (7)
> drv probe link
> Link detected: yes
>
> ~ # ethtool -i eth6
> driver: ixgbe
> version: 4.4.0-k
> firmware-version: 0x800000c9
> bus-info: 0000:05:00.1

What is the SFP you are using to get link? The fact that it is saying
it only supports 1G when it is already connected at 10G is most likely
a bug of some sort. I'll see what we can do to reproduce and root
cause the issue. Also is there any chance you could try testing with
either out out-of-tree driver at e1000.sf.net or try testing with the
latest kernel to see if the issue has already been resolved there?

Thanks.

- Alex