Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/3] net: rtnetlink: Add link-down reason to RTNL messages
From: Petr Machata <hidden>
Date: 2019-03-18 13:47:40
Andrew Lunn [off-list ref] writes:
On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 01:15:41PM +0000, Petr Machata wrote:quoted
Andrew Lunn [off-list ref] writes:quoted
quoted
+enum rtnl_link_down_reason_major { + RTNL_LDR_OTHER,Does 'other' make any sense? Seem better to just not report anything at all, or add a comment that more reasons should be added at the end to reflect whatever the hardware or software can determine.You still have the minor code to give you some information.quoted
quoted
+ RTNL_LDR_NO_CABLE, + RTNL_LDR_UNSUPPORTED_CABLE, + RTNL_LDR_AUTONEG_FAILURE, + RTNL_LDR_NO_LINK_PARTNER, + RTNL_LDR_LINK_TRAINING_FAILURE, + RTNL_LDR_LOGICAL_MISMATCH, + RTNL_LDR_REMOTE_FAULT, + RTNL_LDR_BAD_SIGNAL_INTEGRITY, + RTNL_LDR_CALIBRATION_FAILURE, + RTNL_LDR_POWER_BUDGET_EXCEEDED, +};What about SFP cage empty?, i.e. no SFP, SFP+ module in the cage? AnNo cable? Maybe the name needs to change...An SFP module, and the cable plugged into it via LC connectors, are physically different things. And you can also have an SFP with an RJ45 for 1G copper. I know at higher speeds they can be inseparable, but this needs to be a generic API and also work with them being two separate things.
Understood.
quoted
quoted
SFP can also report LOS. That does not appear to be any of the above. Or that the core SFP code has been unable to read the EEPROM? We haveMy assumption was that cable with unreadable EEPROM is simply a bad cable. Does the admin actually care which particular part of the cable is at fault?Yes. I throw away the SFP module, because its EEPROM is broke, but don't need to replace the 1KM of fibre cable, or 100m of Cat 6a copper cable. Classic example would be fibre to the home.
OK, gotcha.