> 10G_QXGMII is defined in the Cisco USXGMII multi-port document as one
> of several possibilities for a USXGMII-M link. The Cisco document can
> be a little confusing beause it states that 10G_QXGMII supports 10M,
> 100M, 1G and 2.5G, and then only talks about a 10G and 100M/1G MAC.
>
> For 10G_QXGMII, there are 4 MAC interfaces. These are connected to a
> rate "adaption" through symbol replication block, and then on to a
> clause 49 PCS block.
>
> There is then a port MUX and framing block, followed by the PMA
> serdes which communicates with the remote end over a single pair of
> transmit/receive serdes lines.
>
> Each interface also has its own clause 37 autoneg block.
>
> So, for an interface to operate in SGMII mode, it would have to be
> muxed to a different path before being presented to the USXGMII-M
> block since each interface does not have its own external data lane
> - thus that's out of scope of USXGMII-M as documented by Cisco.
Hi Russell
I think it helps.
Where i'm having trouble is deciding if this is actually an interface
mode. Interface mode is a per PHY property. Where as it seems
10G_QXGMII is a property of the USXGMII-M link? Should we be
representing the package with 4 PHYs in it, and specify the package
has a PMA which is using 10G_QXGMII over USXGMII-M? The PHY interface
mode is then internal? Its just the link between the PHY and the MUX?
By saying the interface mode is 10G_QXGMII and not describing the PMA
mode, are we setting ourselves up for problems in the future? Could
there be a PMA interface which could carry different PHY interface
modes?
If we decide we do want to use 10G_QXGMII as an interface made, i
think the driver should be doing some validation. If asked to do
anything else, it should return -EINVAL.
And i don't yet understand how it can also do 1000BaseX and 2500BaseX
and SGMII?
Andrew
