Messages in this thread | | | Subject | i40e/i40e_ethtool.c weirdness? | From | Valdis Kletnieks <> | Date | Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:21:47 -0500 |
| |
(spotted while looking at a 'git bisect visualize' for something else)
After this commit:
Author: Mitch Williams <mitch.a.williams@intel.com> 2014-09-13 03:40:47 Committer: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com> 2014-10-23 23:38:04
i40e: Add 10GBaseT support
Add driver support for 10GBaseT device.
we have the following chunk of code in i40e_ethtool.c:
case I40E_PHY_TYPE_10GBASE_SFPP_CU: ecmd->supported = SUPPORTED_10000baseT_Full; break; case I40E_PHY_TYPE_1000BASE_KX: case I40E_PHY_TYPE_1000BASE_T: ecmd->supported = SUPPORTED_Autoneg | SUPPORTED_10000baseT_Full | SUPPORTED_1000baseT_Full | SUPPORTED_100baseT_Full; ecmd->advertising = ADVERTISED_Autoneg | ADVERTISED_10000baseT_Full | ADVERTISED_1000baseT_Full | ADVERTISED_100baseT_Full; break; case I40E_PHY_TYPE_100BASE_TX: ecmd->supported = SUPPORTED_Autoneg | SUPPORTED_10000baseT_Full | SUPPORTED_1000baseT_Full | SUPPORTED_100baseT_Full; ecmd->advertising = ADVERTISED_Autoneg | ADVERTISED_10000baseT_Full | ADVERTISED_1000baseT_Full | ADVERTISED_100baseT_Full; break; case I40E_PHY_TYPE_SGMII: ecmd->supported = SUPPORTED_Autoneg |
I'm confused by the fact that 2 cases that by name are 100M and 1G parts got bits saying that 10G is "supported" - was that intentional?
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |