Re: kern/58124: lagg(4) fails to work with lacp protocol on mcx(4)

[Andrius V <vezhlys%gmail.com@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR kern/58124; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Andrius V <vezhlys%gmail.com@localhost>
To: s ymgch <s.ymgch228%gmail.com@localhost>, gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Cc: jmcneill%netbsd.org@localhost, yamaguchi%netbsd.org@localhost, gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost, 
	netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Subject: Re: kern/58124: lagg(4) fails to work with lacp protocol on mcx(4)
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 21:48:43 +0300

 Hi,
 
 Comparing OpenBSD and NetBSD driver, there's one place where
 potentially OpenBSD sets full-duplex in comparison to NetBSD:
 https://nxr.netbsd.org/xref/src/sys/dev/pci/if_mcx.c#8176
 https://github.com/openbsd/src/blob/a938a57b1f753b55309620f7e0ecb50db35645b=
 7/sys/dev/pci/if_mcx.c#L8114
 
 However we don't have this particular "link status". So my guess that
 we need to set it in mcx_media_status(), potentially based on media
 type, and it is not needed in ifmedia_add() (need to test). Is there a
 need for more complex logic, I am not sure.
 
 
 On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 12:06=E2=80=AFPM s ymgch <s.ymgch228%gmail.com@localhost> wro=
 te:
 >
 > Hi,
 >
 > I suppose you maintain mcx(4). and this PR is related to the driver.
 > Could you take a look at the PR?
 >
 > Best Regards,
 > Yamaguchi
 >
 > On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 10:37=E2=80=AFAM s ymgch <s.ymgch228%gmail.com@localhost> wr=
 ote:
 > >
 > > Hi,
 > >
 > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 4:20=E2=80=AFAM Andrius V <vezhlys%gmail.com@localhost> wr=
 ote:
 > > >
 > > >  Hi,
 > > >
 > > >  You are completely right! Setting the patch helps and lacp protocol
 > > >  starts to work. mcx0/mcx1 shows "media: Ethernet autoselect
 > > >  (10GBASE-CR1 full-duplex)" now, switch also shows mac address at the
 > > >  "LACP Partner System ID". Thank you for identifying the issue. Can t=
 he
 > > >  patch be applied directly, or more work needs to be done to identify
 > > >  when to set full-duplex mode?
 > >
 > > I don't know whether the patch is correct toward mcx(4) or not, because
 > > I'm not familiar with mcx(4). And I don't have any mcx(4) devices.
 > > So, I'd like someone to review and commit the patch.
 > >
 > > -- Yamaguchi