ACK/Cmnt: [SRU][Focal][PATCH 0/2] Intel x710 LOMs do not work on Focal

[Stefan Bader]

On 16.09.20 23:51, Jeff Lane wrote:
> BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1893956
> 
> [IMPACT]
> The Intel x710-TM4 is one of the latest 10GbE controllers from intel using the
> i40e driver. This particular 4 port comes in a 2x2 arrangement: 2x SFP+ and 2x
> RJ-45. This card is enabled in 5.4 via the inbox version of the i40e driver,
> and hwinfo does show both sides of the card but the kernel only sees the two
> SFP+ ports and cannot address or use the two copper ports.
> 
> These devices have up to 4 ports, but only two seem to work and this has been
> seen on at least two different systems using LOMs based on this.
> 
> This is currently blocking certification for one of our hardware partners.
> 
> [FIX]
> This list of Patches enables the latest X710 controller fully:
> 
> * 3df5b9a6a9ec i40e: enable X710 support
> * d80a476f4a12 i40e: Fix LED blinking flow for X710T*L devices
> 
> These are all clean cherry picks from 5.5 into 5.4
> 
> My tree with these can be found here:
> https://code.launchpad.net/~bladernr/ubuntu/+source/linux/+git/focal/+ref/1893956-update-i40e-intel-lom
> 
> [TESTCASE]
> 
> i40e should load successfully, all ports on Carlsville x710 LOM should be
> visible, can be configured, and can pass traffic at full speed.
> 
> Test kernels have been verified by the vendor reporting the issue that all
> network ports on the LOM are accessible and pass traffic at expected speeds
> once the fix is applied.
> 
> [REGRESSION RISK]
> Should be pretty low. This is a small patch set to a single driver that only
> enables a newer chipset.
> 
> Alice Michael (1):
>   i40e: enable X710 support
> 
> Damian Milosek (1):
>   i40e: Fix LED blinking flow for X710T*L devices
> 
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++--
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_devids.h |  2 ++
>  2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 

The SRU team is rather looking for "regression potential" in the meaning of how
would things probably go wrong. From glancing over the 2 patches only the first
one is maybe changing things. And then it would be not working LEDs (or
incorrectly working ones). Maybe you could extend the bug report that way.


Acked-by: Stefan Bader <stefan.bader at canonical.com>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/attachments/20200917/2c45b30d/attachment.sig>