RE: [PATCH] ixgbe: E610: do not fill EEE lp_advertised from local PHY caps

[Jagielski, Jedrzej]

>From: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@xxxxxxxxx> 
>Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2026 12:13 AM
>On 5/4/2026 7:05 AM, David CARLIER wrote:
>> Hi Andrew,
>> 
>>   No E610 here, found it by reading the code - the X550 path
>>   (ixgbe_get_eee_fw) uses a separate FW_PHY_ACT_UD_2 activity and
>>   ixgbe_lp_map[] for partner data, the E610 path just feeds
>>   pcaps.eee_cap from REPORT_ACTIVE_CFG into lp_advertised. None of
>>   the IXGBE_ACI_REPORT_* modes return partner info so that field
>>   can't be right.
>> 
>>   The set path goes hw->mac.ops.setup_eee() ->
>> ixgbe_aci_set_phy_cfg(),
>>   so negotiation is in the firmware. eee_active / eee_enabled come
>>   from link.eee_status from the same FW, if those bits are right then
>>   negotiation works. Can't say more without hardware, Jedrzej or
>>   Aleksandr would know.
>> 
>> Cheers
>
>Hi David,
>
>Thanks for the report and possible patch. The EEE support just merged,
>and I believe the series has undergone testing. It is possible E610 is
>significantly different from X550.
>
>@Jedrzej,
>
>Could you please look at this patch and the report from David and
>confirm if we need this (or a different?) fix or if the code is correct
>for E610 and explain why in that case?
>
>Thanks,
>Jake

Sorry for the delay in responding, i just came back to the office an
 i didn't have access to my mailbox.

After looking into documentation once again and checking it on my setup
i see that David is right. What a catch, thanks! And sorry for my oversight,
i was convinced that negotiated speeds are reported via that field and
it somehow has not been exposed during my tests.

Moreover, looks like E610 currently doesn't report such.

So i believe we would like to have this fix, thank you once again.

Reviewed-by: Jedrzej Jagielski <jedrzej.jagielski@xxxxxxxxx>

Jedrek