Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2019 15:41:51 -0800 From: Marcel Flores <marcel@brickporch.com> To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ThunderX Networking Message-ID: <FE344936-D6F2-4182-AEF6-D2D795333627@brickporch.com> In-Reply-To: <340B43A0-8E12-4F8C-A7F0-844BF8A55DB8@brickporch.com> References: <340B43A0-8E12-4F8C-A7F0-844BF8A55DB8@brickporch.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Jul 13, 2019, at 1:46 PM, Marcel Flores <marcel@brickporch.com> = wrote: >=20 > Hi All, >=20 > I had some time to poke around at the issue regarding: > https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arm/2019-April/019798.html >=20 > On boot, with 13-CURRENT (r349796) dmesg dumps the following message: >=20 > bgx0: Could not find Matching PHY >=20 > Which seems to come from here: > = https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/blob/master/sys/dev/vnic/thunder_bgx_fd= t.c#L456 >=20 > Playing around with some debugging output, it seems like the check is = falling > through when it checks for matching device names: >=20 > = https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/blob/master/sys/dev/vnic/thunder_bgx_fd= t.c#L196 >=20 > But when I dump the string that it=E2=80=99s comparing to, by adding = the following above line 196: >=20 > device_printf(bgx->dev, "Matching Names: %s to %s\n", phys_name, = type); >=20 > It seems like the match is very "close", but maybe something minute is = getting > in the way: >=20 > bgx0: Checking for length and name > bgx0: Matching names: xfi00 to xfi > bgx0: Matching names: xfi01 to xfi > bgx0: Matching names: xfi02 to xfi > bgx0: Matching names: xfi03 to xfi > bgx0: Could not find matching PHY > device_attach: bgx0 attach returned 6 > bgx0: <ThunderX BGX Ethernet I/O Interface> mem = 0x87e0e1000000-0x87e0e13fffff,0x87e0e1400000-0x87e0e17fffff at device = 0.129 on pci1 > bgx0: Matching names: xlaui10 to xlaui > device_attach: bgx0 attach returned 6 >=20 > In particular, it seems to be failing the second part of the check, = that > ensure's a "\0" or a "@" after the name. >=20 > Could this be an issue with the FDT setup for the thunderx? Maybe = something > simple or an indicator of bigger issues? Am I barking up the wrong = tree? Happy > to do any further digging if anyone has any ideas! >=20 > Thanks, > -Marcel > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-arm@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arm-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" Hi All, Took another look at the this. It seems the issue arose in this commit: https://reviews.freebsd.org/rS334880 Manually removing the additional check and building a kernel allowed it = to match the PHY device. Following the steps outlined here: = https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arm/2015-November/012612.html and was able to get the onboard NIC working. This feels very much like a bug in the check logic of rS334880 to me, = but I admit I'm out of my depth on what exactly it's checking for. -Marcel
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?FE344936-D6F2-4182-AEF6-D2D795333627>