Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

bxe: Add 8727 2500baseX support
Needs ReviewPublic

Authored by adam.jaremko_freebsd_gmail.com on May 31 2023, 6:18 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
F171803750: D40359.id122673.diff
Sun, Sep 13, 4:03 PM
F171800051: D40359.diff
Sun, Sep 13, 3:12 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sat, Aug 22, 9:42 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Aug 8 2026, 7:59 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Jul 30 2026, 10:54 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Jul 29 2026, 10:57 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Jul 28 2026, 5:47 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Jul 23 2026, 9:09 PM

Details

Reviewers
None
Group Reviewers
Contributor Reviews (src)
Summary

Support 2500Base-X on NetXtreme II BCM57711 adapters according to NVRAM configuration

Test Plan

The hardware and nvram configuration have been thoroughly documented by myself at https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r32393899-Internet-Bypassing-the-HH3K-up-to-2-5Gbps-using-a-BCM57711-NIC

Diff Detail

Repository
rG FreeBSD src repository
Lint
Lint Skipped
Unit
Tests Skipped
Build Status
Buildable 51814
Build 48705: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

luca.piccirillo_gmail.com added inline comments.
sys/dev/bxe/bxe_elink.c
10181

I cannot understand this bitmask conditions. It looks to me that you are enforcing 1G capability to be enabled in cap_mask even for 2_5G. Why?

sys/dev/bxe/bxe_elink.c
10181

I cannot understand this bitmask conditions. It looks to me that you are enforcing 1G capability to be enabled in cap_mask even for 2_5G. Why?

Copy and paste form the warpcore patch as a safe guard against misconfiguration when dealing with ediag eeprom changes. 1G is also required for 2.5G in the context of the mdio setup.

The capability checks should be moved further up to the parent statement.