Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [STDS-802-3-25G] Question about Table 45-210 EEE advertisement and Table 45-211 EEE LP ability

The PMA/PMD support of EEE for all 3 modes is identical, so get it right once and you're done there.  And it's likely already there for 10GE backward compatibility support.

It's in the FEC logic that you add time and effort to create and validate the new EEE feature.  So in the short term you'll invest in enabling the RS-FEC operation, then work on EEE for RS-FEC, but time to market may have you ship before the EEE development is done.   

By advertising each mode independently you could save area by excluding BASE-R FEC EEE operation in your design.  RS-FEC and 64/66 modes RapidSync are pretty much free since they use the same methods as normal block sync, while BASE-R uses an orthogonal approach.   

I guess during AN since you know the PHY type and mode you've chosen you could dynamically adjust your NP advertisement if necessary.

I'm good with only 1b for 25G in 45.2.7.13 and 14.  If you can't support it for all modes, then you never set it or adjust it on the fly based on what you resolved to.

-Jeff


On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Brad Booth <bbooth@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jeff,

The confusion I have is we autoneg the technology ability for 25G no FEC, KR-FEC and RS-FEC, but also then do it for deep sleep for each of the technology abilities. What I'm trying to understand is if deep sleep needs to be dependent on each technology ability. In other words, would a PHY advertise all three FEC options, but then only advertise one technology ability is capable of deep sleep. My thought was advertising deep sleep ability would indicate that it applies to all the 25G technologies the PHY is able to support.

I don't care one way or the other, but as a former silicon guy, it just seemed strange to me to design multiple 25G modes in a PHY and then not apply deep sleep (if supported) across all those modes.

Thanks,
Brad

On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Jeff Slavick <jeff.slavick@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Arg.  Confusing 45.2.7.13 (AN) and 45.2.1.14 (PMA/PMD)  

In 45.2.1.4 we have all 4 PHY types.
In 45.2.7.13 we have the combined advertisement of R and R-S.

So we've done the proper thing so far, in that we've combined them during AN, but listed them explicitly in PMA section.

My musing over whether it should be 3b during AN (and in PMA/PMD) still holds true though.

-Jeff


On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Jeff Slavick <jeff.slavick@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Brad,

At the very least we I think should reduce the bits to 25GBASE-xR and 25GBASE-xR-S ability bits.  We only advertise those two during AN, so no need to have independent bits for backplane and cables in EEE as well.   I could see setting only the -S bit happening when a PHY supports deep sleep for 10G speed up, but not RS-FEC operation.

Which then begs whether it should be 3 capability bits based on operating mode of the 25G PHY:  25G 64b/66b deep sleep, 25G BASE-R FEC deep sleep, 25G RS-FEC deep sleep.  

-Jeff

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Brad Booth <bbooth@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
I was in the process of reviewing the draft and noticed that in 45.2.7.13 and 14 that we're exchanging the ability to support deep sleep for 25G, but that we separate out the advertisement/ability based upon KR/CR and KR-S/CR-S.

Is it really necessary to separate them?

Would someone build a PHY that does KR and KR-S but only provide deep sleep for one of the operating modes?

The reason I'm asking is that we're burning through the last two bits in register 7.61 at the same time folks are talking about doing a 50G project.

Any thoughts or feedback on that?

I'm willing to submit a comment on it, but I thought I'd gauge the sense of the reflector first.

Thanks,
Brad