Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] Linux 5.15-rc1 - 82599ES VPD access isue
To:     Hisashi T Fujinaka <htodd@twofifty.com>
Cc:     Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>,
        "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
References: <CAHk-=wgbygOb3hRV+7YOpVcMPTP2oQ=iw6tf09Ydspg7o7BsWQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210913141818.GA27911@codemonkey.org.uk>
 <ab571d7e-0cf5-ffb3-6bbe-478a4ed749dc@gmail.com>
 <20210913201519.GA15726@codemonkey.org.uk>
 <b84b799d-0aaa-c4e1-b61b-8e2316b62bd1@gmail.com>
 <20210913203234.GA6762@codemonkey.org.uk>
 <b24d81e2-5a1e-3616-5a01-abd58c0712f7@gmail.com>
 <b4b543d4-c0c5-3c56-46b7-e17ec579edcc@twofifty.com>
 <367cc748-d411-8cf8-ff95-07715c55e899@gmail.com>
 <20210914142419.GA32324@codemonkey.org.uk>
 <c02876d7-c3f3-1953-334d-1248af919796@twofifty.com>
 <80718d5e-a4d2-ff85-aa8f-cd790c951278@gmail.com>
 <14f6d9e9-aca8-133-67f5-92effa2ea280@twofifty.com>
From:   Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <d49182d6-15fe-15a1-c063-4808942a84c1@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Sep 2021 18:05:34 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <14f6d9e9-aca8-133-67f5-92effa2ea280@twofifty.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 15.09.2021 16:18, Hisashi T Fujinaka wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Sep 2021, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> 
>> On 14.09.2021 22:00, Hisashi T Fujinaka wrote:
>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2021, Dave Jones wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 07:51:22AM +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry to reply from my personal account. If I did it from my work
>>>>>> account I'd be top-posting because of Outlook and that goes over like a
>>>>>> lead balloon.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyway, can you send us a dump of your eeprom using ethtool -e? You can
>>>>>> either send it via a bug on e1000.sourceforge.net or try sending it to
>>>>>> todd.fujinaka@intel.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The other thing is I'm wondering is what the subvendor device ID you
>>>>>> have is referring to because it's not in the pci database. Some ODMs
>>>>>> like getting creative with what they put in the NVM.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Todd Fujinaka (todd.fujinaka@intel.com)
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the prompt reply. Dave, could you please provide the requested
>>>>> information?
>>>>
>>>> sent off-list.
>>>>
>>>>     Dave
>>>
>>> Whoops. I replied from outlook again.
>>>
>>> I have confirmation that this should be a valid image. The VPD is just a
>>> series of 3's. There are changes to preboot header, flash and BAR size,
>>> and as far as I can tell, a nonsense subdevice ID, but this should work.
>>>
>>> What was the original question?
>>>
>> "lspci -vv" complains about an invalid short tag 0x06 and the PCI VPD
>> code resulted in a stall. So it seems the data doesn't have valid VPD
>> format as defined in PCI specification.
>>
>> 01:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82599ES 10-Gigabit SFI/SFP+ Network Connection (rev 01)
>>        Subsystem: Device 1dcf:030a
>>     ...
>>             Capabilities: [e0] Vital Product Data
>>                *Unknown small resource type 06, will not decode more.*
>>
>> Not sure which method is used by the driver to get the EEPROM content.
>> For the issue here is relevant what is exposed via PCI VPD.
>>
>> The related kernel error message has been reported few times, e.g. here:
>> https://access.redhat.com/solutions/3001451
>> Only due to a change in kernel code this became a more prominent
>> issue now.
>>
>> You say that VPD is just a series of 3's. This may explain why kernel and
>> tools complain about an invalid VPD format. VPD misses the tag structure.
> 
> I think I conflated two issues and yours may not be the one with the
> weird Amazon NIC. In any case, the VPD does not match the spec and two
> people have confirmed it's just full of 3's. With the bogus subvendor
> ID, I'm thinking this is not an Intel NIC.
> 
> Next step is to contact whoever made the NIC and ask them for guidance.
> 
In an earlier mail in this thread was stated that subvendor id is unknown.
Checking here https://pcisig.com/membership/member-companies?combine=1dcf
it says: Beijing Sinead Technology Co., Ltd.

> Todd Fujinaka <todd.fujinaka@intel.com>