David,

The results being reported are expected.

>   Supports auto-negotiation: No   ( We think this should be Yes )

Actually no...  The virtual function (VF) device does not do any 
auto-negotiation.  It requires the physical function (PF) device to do that on 
its behalf.

>   Advertised auto-negotiation: No ( We think this should be Yes )

Again, no.  The VF does no auto-negotiation.  It depends upon the PF device for 
that.

>   Port: Unknown! (255)  ( We think this should be Twisted Pair )

The VF has no knowledge of or need of such knowledge of the Phy port type.  
Therefore it is in fact unknown.

>   Transceiver: Unknown!  ( We think this should be external )

Same as previous - VF has no knowledge of it and shouldn't be concerned.

>   Auto-negotiation: off  ( We think this should be on )

And the same here.  The VF does not initiate, advertise or engage in 
auto-negotiation.  It can only report the link speed set by the PF device and 
whether the link is up and it does that.

The 82599 supports up to 63 VF devices.  If each VF was able to control and 
initiate auto-negotiation parameters it would be a real mess to manage.  Our 
controller doesn't allow that and doesn't even allow the VF to even see the 
information for security reasons.

- Greg

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Yeung [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 11:45 AM
> To: Rose, Gregory V
> Cc: Kirsher, Jeffrey T; e1000-devel; Allan, Bruce W; Brandeburg, Jesse;
> Steve Sarvate
> Subject: Re: Question about ixgbevf driver
> 
> Greg,
> 
> Thank you for your help!
> In the OEL 5.5 guest domain, its ethtool reports strange results of
> virtual interfaces of Twinville:
>   Supports auto-negotiation: No   ( We think this should be Yes )
>   Advertised auto-negotiation: No ( We think this should be Yes )
>   Port: Unknown! (255)  ( We think this should be Twisted Pair )
>   Transceiver: Unknown!  ( We think this should be external )
>   Auto-negotiation: off  ( We think this should be on )
> 
> Do you see this problem in your guest OS OEL 5.6 and 5.5?
> 
> For details:
> ==================================================================
> eth5 and eth6 are virtual interfaces of Twinville
> 
> [root@Twinville_VM_156 ~]# ethtool eth5
> Settings for eth5:
>          Supported ports: [ ]
>          Supported link modes:   10000baseT/Full
>          Supports auto-negotiation: No
>          Advertised link modes:  Not reported
>          Advertised auto-negotiation: No
>          Speed: 10000Mb/s
>          Duplex: Full
>          Port: Unknown! (255)
>          PHYAD: 0
>          Transceiver: Unknown!
>          Auto-negotiation: off
>          Current message level: 0x00000007 (7)
>          Link detected: yes
> [root@Twinville_VM_156 ~]#
> [root@Twinville_VM_156 ~]# ethtool eth6
> Settings for eth6:
>          Supported ports: [ ]
>          Supported link modes:   10000baseT/Full
>          Supports auto-negotiation: No
>          Advertised link modes:  Not reported
>          Advertised auto-negotiation: No
>          Speed: 10000Mb/s
>          Duplex: Full
>          Port: Unknown! (255)
>          PHYAD: 0
>          Transceiver: Unknown!
>          Auto-negotiation: off
>          Current message level: 0x00000007 (7)
>          Link detected: yes
> [root@Twinville_VM_162 ~]# ethtool -i eth5
> driver: ixgbevf
> version: 2.4.0-NAPI
> firmware-version: N/A
> bus-info: 0000:00:08.0
> [root@Twinville_VM_162 ~]#
> [root@Twinville_VM_162 ~]# ethtool -i eth6
> driver: ixgbevf
> version: 2.4.0-NAPI
> firmware-version: N/A
> bus-info: 0000:00:09.0
> [root@Twinville_VM_162 ~]#
> [root@Twinville_VM_156 ~]# more  /etc/*release
> ::::::::::::::
> /etc/enterprise-release
> ::::::::::::::
> Enterprise Linux Enterprise Linux Server release 5.5 (Carthage)
> ::::::::::::::
> /etc/redhat-release
> ::::::::::::::
> Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 5.5 (Tikanga)
> [root@Twinville_VM_156 ~]#
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> David
> 
> On 01/09/12 09:52, Rose, Gregory V wrote:
> > David,
> >
> > We've found that if we use RHEL 5.5 as the guest then the bug still
> occurs but if we upgrade the guest OS to RHEL 5.6 then it does not occur.
> So it does not appear to be a driver bug.  It looks like some issue with
> RHEL 5.5 and OEL 5.5.
> >
> > We suggest upgrading to 5.6.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > - Greg
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Rose, Gregory V
> >> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 4:32 PM
> >> To: Rose, Gregory V; Kirsher, Jeffrey T; [email protected]
> >> Cc: e1000-devel; Allan, Bruce W; Brandeburg, Jesse; Steve Sarvate
> >> Subject: RE: Question about ixgbevf driver
> >>
> >> David,
> >>
> >> We've confirmed the bug and are looking into it.  We'll keep you
> updated
> >> on what we find.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> - Greg
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Rose, Gregory V [mailto:[email protected]]
> >>> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 8:06 AM
> >>> To: Kirsher, Jeffrey T; [email protected]
> >>> Cc: e1000-devel; Allan, Bruce W; Brandeburg, Jesse; Steve Sarvate
> >>> Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] Question about ixgbevf driver
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Kirsher, Jeffrey T
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 7:58 PM
> >>>> To: [email protected]; Rose, Gregory V
> >>>> Cc: Brandeburg, Jesse; Allan, Bruce W; Steve Sarvate; e1000-devel
> >>>> Subject: Re: Question about ixgbevf driver
> >>>>
> >>>> Adding e1000-devel mailing list as well as Greg Rose (ixgbevf
> >>>> maintainer)...
> >>>
> >>> I've never noticed this before but then I can't say as how I was
> looking
> >>> for it either.  Let me check it out and I'll get back to you.
> >>>
> >>> - Greg
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 17:26 -0800, David Yeung wrote:
> >>>>> Hi  Bruce/Jeffrey/Jesse/,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> How do you do?
> >>>>> We are using the  ixgbevf  driver ( version: 2.4.0-NAPI ) to test
> >> the
> >>>>> VLAN interfaces of Twinville NICs inside the OEL 5 virtual machine,
> >> it
> >>>>> looks like the bi-directional network traffic ran properly on the
> >> VLAN
> >>>>> interfaces of Twinville NICs  inside the OEL 5 virtual machine for
> >>>>> hours, but the ifconfig command reports strange amount ( it is 0 all
> >>>>> the time )  of  RX packets and RX bytes of VLAN interfaces of
> >>> Twinville:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [root@Twinville_VM_156 ~]# ifconfig
> >>>>> .........................................
> >>>>> eth6.10   Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr F2:54:11:05:72:7C
> >>>>>             inet addr:192.6.10.156  Bcast:192.6.10.255
> >>>> Mask:255.255.255.0
> >>>>>             UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:9210  Metric:1
> >>>>>             RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> >>>>>             TX packets:111332155 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0
> >>> carrier:0
> >>>>>             collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
> >>>>>             RX bytes:0 (0.0 b)  TX bytes:2565278846027 (2.3 TiB)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> eth6.11   Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr F2:54:11:05:72:7C
> >>>>>             inet addr:192.6.11.156  Bcast:192.6.11.255
> >>>> Mask:255.255.255.0
> >>>>>             UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:9210  Metric:1
> >>>>>             RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> >>>>>             TX packets:111289098 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0
> >>> carrier:0
> >>>>>             collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
> >>>>>             RX bytes:0 (0.0 b)  TX bytes:2562582125939 (2.3 TiB)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> eth6.12   Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr F2:54:11:05:72:7C
> >>>>>             inet addr:192.6.12.156  Bcast:192.6.12.255
> >>>> Mask:255.255.255.0
> >>>>>             UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:9210  Metric:1
> >>>>>             RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> >>>>>             TX packets:111287930 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0
> >>> carrier:0
> >>>>>             collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
> >>>>>             RX bytes:0 (0.0 b)  TX bytes:2564949229588 (2.3 TiB)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> eth6.13   Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr F2:54:11:05:72:7C
> >>>>>             inet addr:192.6.93.156  Bcast:192.6.93.255
> >>>> Mask:255.255.255.0
> >>>>>             UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:9210  Metric:1
> >>>>>             RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> >>>>>             TX packets:111070858 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0
> >>> carrier:0
> >>>>>             collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
> >>>>>             RX bytes:0 (0.0 b)  TX bytes:2566358628283 (2.3 TiB)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> eth6.14   Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr F2:54:11:05:72:7C
> >>>>>             inet addr:192.6.14.156  Bcast:192.6.14.255
> >>>> Mask:255.255.255.0
> >>>>>             UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:9210  Metric:1
> >>>>>             RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> >>>>>             TX packets:111362848 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0
> >>> carrier:0
> >>>>>             collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
> >>>>>             RX bytes:0 (0.0 b)  TX bytes:2566349976603 (2.3 TiB)
> >>>>> .........................................
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [root@Twinville_VM_156 ~]# ethtool -i eth6
> >>>>> driver: ixgbevf
> >>>>> version: 2.4.0-NAPI
> >>>>> firmware-version: N/A
> >>>>> bus-info: 0000:00:09.0
> >>>>> [root@Powerville_VM_156 ~]#
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [root@Twinville_VM_156 ~]# cat   /etc/*release
> >>>>> Enterprise Linux Enterprise Linux Server release 5.5 (Carthage) Red
> >>>>> Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 5.5 (Tikanga)
> >>>>> [root@Twinville_VM_156 ~]#
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Do you have any idea about this problem? Any workaround/fix for this
> >>>>> problem?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> David
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> >> --
> >>> ----
> >>> Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a
> >> complex
> >>> infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access
> >> to
> >>> virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual
> >>> desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI
> >> infrastructure
> >>> costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> E1000-devel mailing list
> >>> [email protected]
> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel
> >>> To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit
> >>> http://communities.intel.com/community/wired


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a complex
infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access to
virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual 
desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI infrastructure 
costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox
_______________________________________________
E1000-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel
To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit 
http://communities.intel.com/community/wired

Reply via email to