Commit 119b0e03 authored by Stefan Assmann's avatar Stefan Assmann Committed by Peter P Waskiewicz Jr

igb: add delay to allow igb loopback test to succeed on 8086:10c9

Some 8086:10c9 NICs have a problem completing the ethtool loopback test.
The result looks like this:

ethtool -t eth1
The test result is FAIL
The test extra info:
Register test  (offline)         0
Eeprom test    (offline)         0
Interrupt test (offline)         0
Loopback test  (offline)         13
Link test   (on/offline)         0

A bisect clearly points to commit a95a0744.
However that seems to only trigger the bug. While adding some printk the
problem disappeared, so this might be a timing issue. After some trial and
error I discovered that adding a small delay just before igb_write_phy_reg()
in igb_integrated_phy_loopback() allows the loopback test to succeed.
I was unable to figure out the root cause so far but I expect it to be
somewhere in the following executing path
igb_integrated_phy_loopback
->igb_write_phy_reg_igp
  ->igb_write_phy_reg_mdic
    ->igb_acquire_phy_82575
      ->igb_acquire_swfw_sync_82575

The problem could only be observed on 8086:10c9 NICs so far and not all
of them show the behaviour. I did not restrict the workaround to this
type of NIC as it should do no harm to other igb NICs.

With the patch below the loopback test succeeded 500 times in a row
using a NIC that would otherwise fail.
Signed-off-by: default avatarStefan Assmann <sassmann@kpanic.de>
Tested-by: default avatarAaron Brown <aaron.f.brown@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarPeter P Waskiewicz Jr <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@intel.com>
parent eca90f55
...@@ -1498,6 +1498,9 @@ static int igb_integrated_phy_loopback(struct igb_adapter *adapter) ...@@ -1498,6 +1498,9 @@ static int igb_integrated_phy_loopback(struct igb_adapter *adapter)
break; break;
} }
/* add small delay to avoid loopback test failure */
msleep(50);
/* force 1000, set loopback */ /* force 1000, set loopback */
igb_write_phy_reg(hw, PHY_CONTROL, 0x4140); igb_write_phy_reg(hw, PHY_CONTROL, 0x4140);
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment