Re: [PATCH iwl-next v4 0/3] igc: add support for forcing link speed without autonegotiation

[David Laight]

On Wed, 6 May 2026 14:21:59 +0800
"Abdul Rahim, Faizal" <faizal.abdul.rahim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 30/4/2026 10:41 pm, David Laight wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Apr 2026 14:00:06 +0800
> > KhaiWenTan <khai.wen.tan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >   
> >> From: Faizal Rahim <faizal.abdul.rahim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> This series adds support for forcing 10/100 Mb/s link speed via ethtool
> >> when autonegotiation is disabled on the igc driver.  
> > 
> > I'll ask 'why' ?
> > 
> > In particular forcing half/full duplex has always been a very good way
> > of 'breaking' a network connection.
> > 
> > It really is much better to restrict the advertised link modes and let
> > the autodetect/autonegotiation logic in the phy/mac do its job.
> > 
> > About the only think I can think of is to force 10M HDX when connected
> > to a remote system that supports 10M/100M HDX.
> > In that case you need to send out single link test pulses, not the
> > burst used to identify 100M HDX, or the pattern encoded on the burst
> > used by autonegotiation.
> > But you need to got back to the mid 1990s to find such systems.
> > Anything that supports FDX will do autonegotiation.
> > 
> > 	David
> >   
> 
> There's a use case requested:
> 
> Profinet Certification tool reports that forcing a link speed without
> auto-negotiation is not working.
> Forcing the link speed is a critical feature for the industrial automation
> "fast-start" use case. When there is a connection lost, the system must
> come back up as fast as possible. In PROFINET, that means to force the
> speed and rejoin the controller loops. Without supporting forcing the speed
> to 100M in Foxville, the certification tool would not be able to certify
> the availability of this feature.
> 
> I'm hoping this context is enough to justify the need?

Is auto-negotiation of the 'low' speed actually that slow?
IIRC detecting 10G and above requires a lot of signal processing.
But 10/100 and hdx/fdx just uses the ANAR register value sent in the
link test pulses.
(IIRC 1G uses the ANAR pattern, but requires extra signal processing as well.
The higher speeds didn't exist when I was writing ethernet drivers.)

I've been on the 'wrong end' of hdx/fdx mismatches - you really don't
want to let people get there, it is terribly confusing.

There actually ought to be a way of setting the auto-negotiation
registers to 100M (HDX and/or FDX) and then transmitting as (say) 100M HDX
even before negotiation completes.
Then correcting hdx/fdx based on the received ANAR register.
Or, at least, sending out an ANAR that only contains what you are using.

The problem I always had was that the actual operating mode of the phy
wasn't in one of the standard registers.
So if you connected to a system that didn't do auto-negotiation the
phy would be using (say) 10M HDX, but the received ANAR register would
still contain a value from an earlier connection.
If the driver read that register from the phy it used the wrong duplex mode.
(The speed for 10/100 doesn't matter, the phy clocks the interface to the
mac at the right speed and the mac doesn't care.)

	David