Re: e1000: LED indicates trouble,

>> From: Hiroki Ohashi
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I faced the following situations.
>> The LED of NIC was indicated, even when the system was not linked
>> the network (auto-negotiation failed or link partner cannot
>> auto-negotiate).
>> LED should be indicate only when the network was linked.
>> And so, it is a problem that LED indicates.
>>
>> I think the indicating the LED is a problem for maintenance.
>> I cannot know the condition of the link, because I confirm
>> to link up by LED's indication.
>>
>> We are using 82571EB ethernet controler and serdes interface.
>>
>> I think this problem is caused by the e1000 device driver
>> setting LU and SLU bits in the interface and forcing the link
>> to go up.
>> I deleted this logic. (the following modification.)
>> Then, LED was turned off.
>>
>> ================================
>> --- e1000_hw.c.org
>> +++ e1000_hw.c
>> @@ -3069,6 +3069,7 @@I
>> hw->autoneg_failed = 1;
>> return 0;
>> }
>> +#if 0
>> DEBUGOUT("NOT RXing /C/, disable AutoNeg and force link.\n");
>>
>> /* Disable auto-negotiation in the TXCW register */
>> @@ -3078,6 +3079,7 @@
>> ctrl = E1000_READ_REG(hw, CTRL);
>> ctrl |= (E1000_CTRL_SLU | E1000_CTRL_FD);
>> E1000_WRITE_REG(hw, CTRL, ctrl);
>> +#endif
>>
>> /* Configure Flow Control after forcing link up. */
>> ret_val = e1000_config_fc_after_link_up(hw);
>> ================================
>>
>>
>> I think the e1000 driver should enable/disable force-link-up
>> depending on the condition of the link.
>> But I don't know a good way to do this.
>> If you have any good ideas, please let me know.
>>
>> As a temporary idea, I thought of a way of adding a module parameter
>> to control enable/disable force-link-up.
>> The patch is as follows.
>>
>> This patch adds "disable_force_link_up_when_autoneg_failed"
>> as module parameter. When this is 0, force-link-up is disable.
>>
>> From: Hiroshi Shimamoto
>> Signed-off-by: Hiroshi Shimamoto
>>
>> ================================
>> --- drivers/net/e1000/e1000_hw.h.org
>> +++ drivers/net/e1000/e1000_hw.h
>> @@ -1469,6 +1469,7 @@ struct e1000_hw {
>> bool has_manc2h;
>> bool rx_needs_kicking;
>> bool has_smbus;
>> + bool disable_force_link_up_when_autoneg_failed;
>> };
>> --- drivers/net/e1000/e1000_param.c.org
>> +++ drivers/net/e1000/e1000_param.c
>> @@ -196,6 +196,13 @@ E1000_PARAM(SmartPowerDownEnable, "Enabl
>> */
>> E1000_PARAM(KumeranLockLoss, "Enable Kumeran lock loss workaround");
>>
>> +/* Enable Force Link Up When AutoNeg Failed
>> + *
>> + * Valid Range: 0, 1
>> + *
>> + * Default Value: 1 (force link up enabled) */
>> +E1000_PARAM(EnableForceLinkOnSERDES, "Enable force link up when AutoNeg failed");
>> +
>> struct e1000_option {
>> enum { enable_option, range_option, list_option } type;
>> const char *name;
>> @@ -534,6 +541,23 @@ void __devinit e1000_check_options(struc
>> adapter->hw.kmrn_lock_loss_workaround_disabled = !opt.def;
>> }
>> }
>> + { /* Enable Force Link Up When AutoNeg Failed */
>> + struct e1000_option opt = {
>> + .type = enable_option,
>> + .name = "Enable Force Link Up When AutoNeg Failed",
>> + .err = "defaulting to Enabled",
>> + .def = OPTION_ENABLED
>> + };
>> +
>> + if (num_EnableForceLinkOnSERDES > bd) {
>> + unsigned int force_link_up = EnableForceLinkOnSERDES [bd];
>> + e1000_validate_option(&force_link_up, &opt, adapter);
>> + adapter->hw.disable_force_link_up_when_autoneg_failed = !force_link_up;
>> +
>> + } else {
>> + adapter->hw.disable_force_link_up_when_autoneg_failed = !opt.def;
>> + }
>> + }
>>
>> switch (adapter->hw.media_type) {
>> case e1000_media_type_fiber:
>> --- drivers/net/e1000/e1000_hw.c.org
>> +++ drivers/net/e1000/e1000_hw.c
>> @@ -3062,6 +3062,12 @@ s32 e1000_check_for_link(struct e1000_hw
>> hw->autoneg_failed = 1;
>> return 0;
>> }
>> +
>> + if (hw->disable_force_link_up_when_autoneg_failed) {
>> + DEBUGOUT("Force Link Up Disabled\n");
>> + return -E1000_ERR_PHY;
>> + }
>> +
>> DEBUGOUT("NOT RXing /C/, disable AutoNeg and force link.\n");
>>
>> /* Disable auto-negotiation in the TXCW register */
>> ================================
>> --
>>
>
>I am a little confused. You state you are using an NIC (82571EB)
>which is currently not supported by e1000, but is supported in the
>e1000e driver. Then you suggest a change to the e1000 driver to
>resolve an issue you see with your 82571EB NIC.
>
>So I would suggest you use the e1000e driver first.


linux-kernel:
Eric Paris	[RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to a linux interface for on access scanning
Mark Fasheh	Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 -- sys_fallocate
Linus Torvalds	Linux 2.6.21-rc4
Linus Torvalds	Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
git:

linux-netdev:
David Miller	[GIT]: Networking
David Miller	Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock().
Gerrit Renker	[PATCH 15/37] dccp: Set per-connection CCIDs via socket options
Christoph Lameter	Network latency regressions from 2.6.22 to 2.6.29
openbsd-misc:

Re: e1000: LED indicates trouble,

Online users