diff options
| author | Joe McGill <jmcgill@us.ibm.com> | 2018-07-26 08:58:13 -0500 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Sachin Gupta <sgupta2m@in.ibm.com> | 2018-07-31 04:11:36 -0500 |
| commit | bb2581994b1695d37cd75fdee048eb4d85330d24 (patch) | |
| tree | 2e81b259982e83ed6f835b71a89fd6bc784cf051 /src/test/testcases | |
| parent | 2eb270876749e3721ff9996e1208784a264819e6 (diff) | |
| download | talos-sbe-bb2581994b1695d37cd75fdee048eb4d85330d24.tar.gz talos-sbe-bb2581994b1695d37cd75fdee048eb4d85330d24.zip | |
Validate OBUS DL lane failed indications during initial link training
Under certain circumstances, the DL logic can consume a spare lane
during training, reporting that the link trained successfully but without
reporting a lane sparing event in the FIR
This commit adds a change to check for failed lanes in this case, and:
- raise the lane spared indication in the FIR if a single lane is spared
(no HWP error returned, but attention can trigger MFG IPL failure)
- mark the link as failed to train if more than a single lane is marked
spared, to trigger reconfig loop
Change-Id: Iecc69bb1cad172d9c0b16c9b987cc6896e46216b
CQ: SW439577
Reviewed-on: http://rchgit01.rchland.ibm.com/gerrit1/63383
Tested-by: Jenkins Server <pfd-jenkins+hostboot@us.ibm.com>
Tested-by: HWSV CI <hwsv-ci+hostboot@us.ibm.com>
Tested-by: Hostboot CI <hostboot-ci+hostboot@us.ibm.com>
Tested-by: PPE CI <ppe-ci+hostboot@us.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: DANIEL C. HOWE <dchowe@us.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Megan P. Nguyen <pmegan@us.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Jennifer A. Stofer <stofer@us.ibm.com>
Reviewed-on: http://rchgit01.rchland.ibm.com/gerrit1/63394
Reviewed-by: Sachin Gupta <sgupta2m@in.ibm.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'src/test/testcases')
| -rw-r--r-- | src/test/testcases/testSecurity.py | 4 |
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/src/test/testcases/testSecurity.py b/src/test/testcases/testSecurity.py index 5da28790..770ef012 100644 --- a/src/test/testcases/testSecurity.py +++ b/src/test/testcases/testSecurity.py @@ -129,9 +129,9 @@ def main(): # Do putScom on grey list register testScomUtil.putscom(0x0901080B, 0, [0x00, 0x05, 0x00, 0x23]) # Do putScomUnderMask with exact mask - testScomUtil.putScomUnderMask(0x0901080B, dataWritten, 0xFF0FFFFFFFFFFFFF) + testScomUtil.putScomUnderMask(0x0901080B, dataWritten, 0xFF0FFFFFFF0FFFFF) # Do putScomUnderMask with superset mask - testScomUtil.putScomUnderMask(0x0901080B, dataWritten, 0xFF00FFFFFFFFFFFF) + testScomUtil.putScomUnderMask(0x0901080B, dataWritten, 0xFF00FFFFFF0FFFFF) print "Greylist testcases - passed" # indirect scom test |
