[ Upstream commit
655c91414579d7bb115a4f7898ee726fc18e0984 ]
Some transceivers may comply with SFF-8472 but not implement the Digital
Diagnostic Monitoring (DDM) interface described in it. The existence of
such area is specified by bit 6 of byte 92, set to 1 if implemented.
Currently, due to not checking this bit ixgbe fails trying to read SFP
module's eeprom with the follow message:
ethtool -m enP51p1s0f0
Cannot get Module EEPROM data: Input/output error
Because it fails to read the additional 256 bytes in which it was assumed
to exist the DDM data.
This issue was noticed using a Mellanox Passive DAC PN 01FT738. The eeprom
data was confirmed by Mellanox as correct and present in other Passive
DACs in from other manufacturers.
Signed-off-by: "Mauro S. M. Rodrigues" <maurosr@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
Tested-by: Andrew Bowers <andrewx.bowers@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
page_swap = true;
}
- if (sff8472_rev == IXGBE_SFF_SFF_8472_UNSUP || page_swap) {
+ if (sff8472_rev == IXGBE_SFF_SFF_8472_UNSUP || page_swap ||
+ !(addr_mode & IXGBE_SFF_DDM_IMPLEMENTED)) {
/* We have a SFP, but it does not support SFF-8472 */
modinfo->type = ETH_MODULE_SFF_8079;
modinfo->eeprom_len = ETH_MODULE_SFF_8079_LEN;
#define IXGBE_SFF_SOFT_RS_SELECT_10G 0x8
#define IXGBE_SFF_SOFT_RS_SELECT_1G 0x0
#define IXGBE_SFF_ADDRESSING_MODE 0x4
+#define IXGBE_SFF_DDM_IMPLEMENTED 0x40
#define IXGBE_SFF_QSFP_DA_ACTIVE_CABLE 0x1
#define IXGBE_SFF_QSFP_DA_PASSIVE_CABLE 0x8
#define IXGBE_SFF_QSFP_CONNECTOR_NOT_SEPARABLE 0x23