Thanks, Todd. I already am in discussions with the factory rep - which is half Portwell (COM Express board) and half us (carrier board with SFP+). I can certainly provide our side of the design (COM Express connector to SFP+).
But the main question I had for this list I think (I hope) can be answered without any of that... Can the ixgbe driver work without a PHY (e.g., CS4227) between the X552 and SFP+? Knowing the answer to that would help the ongoing troubleshooting. It seems like the CS4227 is just a line buffer with some features, and a design with short traces could work without it. But I don't know if there is something it does electrically that is required or if the ixgbe driver is currently written such that it won't work without the PHY. Fujinaka, Todd wrote at 16:51 +0000 on Jun 18, 2020: > Sorry, not enough coffee. Beyond what we are going to be able to answer via > email, mainly because of all the design details, etc. > > Todd Fujinaka > Software Application Engineer > Data Center Group > Intel Corporation > todd.fujin...@intel.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: Fujinaka, Todd <todd.fujin...@intel.com> > Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 9:38 AM > To: John H <5snkaz3...@snkmail.com>; E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] ixgbe for 10 GbE SFP+ without CS4227 phy > > Can you file a bug directly through your factory rep? I think this is beyond > what we're going to answer via email. > > Todd Fujinaka > Software Application Engineer > Data Center Group > Intel Corporation > todd.fujin...@intel.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: John H <5snkaz3...@snkmail.com> > Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2020 2:39 PM > To: E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: [E1000-devel] ixgbe for 10 GbE SFP+ without CS4227 phy > > Can the ixgbe driver be used without a CS4227 PHY between the NIC (X552 in > this case) and the SFP+? Do you have to configure anything (driver > settings, EEPROM firmware) to support that? > > I do see a CS4227 error message from the driver, but it's not clear if that > is fatal: > > Jun 17 21:36:26 localhost kernel: ixgbe 0000:04:00.0: eth10: CS4227 reset > failed: -18 Jun 17 21:36:26 localhost kernel: ixgbe 0000:04:00.0: registered > PHC device on eth10 Jun 17 21:36:26 localhost kernel: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): > eth10: link is not ready Jun 17 21:36:26 localhost kernel: ixgbe > 0000:04:00.0: eth10: detected SFP+: 5 > > However, I am not seeing link (NO-CARRIER). > > Here is 'ethtool -m', so it's talking to the SFP+ okay. > > $ sudo ethtool -m eth10 > Identifier : 0x03 (SFP) > Extended identifier : 0x04 (GBIC/SFP defined by 2-wire interface ID) > Connector : 0x07 (LC) > Transceiver codes : 0x10 0x00 0x000x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 > : => 10G Ethernet: 10G Base-SR > Encoding : 0x06 (64B/66B) > BR, Nominal : 10300MBd > Rate identifier : 0x00 (unspecified) > Length (SMF,km) : 0km > Length (SMF) : 0m > Length (50um) : 80m > Length (62.5um) : 20m > Length (Copper) : 0m > Length (OM3) : 300m > Laser wavelength : 850nm > Vendor name : CISCO-INTEGRA > Vendor OUI : c8:de:51 > Vendor PN : SFP-10G-SR-S-IO > Vendor rev : 01 _______________________________________________ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel Ethernet, visit https://forums.intel.com/s/topic/0TO0P00000018NbWAI/intel-ethernet
