PCIe over fiber optics notes (using SFP+)

This post was written by eli on August 5, 2016
Posted Under: FPGA,PCI express


As part of a larger project, I was required to set up a PCIe link between a host and some FPGAs through a fiber link, in order to ensure medical-grade electrical isolation of a high-bandwidth video data link + allow for control over the same link.

These are a few jots on carrying a 1x Gen2 PCI Express link over a plain SFP+ fiber optics interface. PCIe is, after all, just one GTX lane going in each direction, so it’s quite natural to carry each Gigabit Transceiver lane on an optical link.

When a general-purpose host computer is used, at least one PCIe switch is required in order to ensure that the optical link is based upon a steady, non-spread spectrum clock. If an FPGA is used as a single endpoint at the other side of the link, it can be connected directly to the SFP+ adapter, with the condition that the FPGA’s PCIe block is set to asynchronous clock mode.

Since my project involved more than one endpoint on the far end (an FPGA and USB 3.0 chip), I went for the solution of one PCIe switch on each end. Avago’s PEX 8606, to be specific.

All in all, there are two issues that really require attention:

  • Clocking: Making sure that the clocks on both sides are within the required range (and it doesn’t hurt if they’re clean from jitter)
  • Handling the receiver detect issue, detailed below

How each signal is handled

  • Tx/Rx lanes: Passed through with fiber. The differential pair is simply connected to the SFP+ respective data input and output.
  • PERST: Signaled by turning off laser on the upstream side and issuing PERST to everything on the downstream side on (a debounced) LOS (Loss of Signal).
  • Clock: Not required. Keep both clocks clean, and within 250 ppm.
  • PRSNT: Generated locally, if this is at all relevant
  • All other PCIe signals are not mandatory

Some insights

  • It’s as easy (or difficult) as setting up a PCIe switch on both sides. The optical link itself is not adding any particular difficulty.
  • Dual clock mode on the PCIe switches is mandatory (hence only certain devices are suitable). The isolated clock goes to a specific lane (pair?), and not all configurations are possible (e.g. not all 1x on PEX8606).
  • According to PCIe spec, the LTSSM goes to Polling if a receiver has been detected (that is, a load is sensed), but Polling returns to Detect if there is no proper training sequence received from the other end. So apparently there is no problem with a fiber optic transceiver, even though it presents itself as a false load in the absence of a link partner at the other side of the fiber: The LTSSM will just keep looping between Detect and Polling until such partner appears.
  • The SFP+ RD pins are transmitters on the PCIe wire pair, and the TD are receivers. Don’t get confused.
  • AC coupling: All lane wires must have an 100 nF capacitor in series. External connectors (e.g. PCIe fingers) must have an capacitor on PET side (but must not have one on the ingoing signal).
  • Turn off ASPM wherever possible. Most BIOSes and many Linux kernels volunteer doing that automatically, but it’s worth making sure ASPM is never turned on in any usage scenario. A lot of errors are related to the L0s state (which is invoked by ASPM) in both switches and endpoints.

PEX 86xx notes

  • PEX_NT_RESETn is an output signal (but shouldn’t be used anyhow)
  • It seems like the PLX device cares about nothing that happened before the reset: A lousy voltage ramp-up or the absence of clock. All if forgotten and forgiven.
  • A fairly new chipset and BIOS are required on the motherboard, say from year 2012 and on, or the switch isn’t handled properly by the host.
  • On a Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. G31M-ES2L/G31M-ES2L, BIOS FH 04/30/2010, the motherboard’s BIOS stopped the clock short after powering up (it gave up, probably), and that made the PEX clockless, probably, leading to completely weird behavior.
  • There’s a difference between the lane numbering a port numbering (the latter used in function numbers of the “virtual” endpoints created with respect to each port). For example, on 8606 running a 2x-1x-1x-1x-1x configuration, lanes 0-1, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are mapped to ports 0, 1, 5, 7 and 9 respectively. Port 4 is lane 1 in an all-1x configuration (with other ports mapped the same).
  • The PEX doesn’t detect an SFP+ transceiver as a receiver on the respective PET lane, which prevents bringup of the fiber lane, unless the SerDes X Mask Receiver Not Detected bit is enabled in the relevant register (e.g. bit 16 at address 0x204). The lane still produces its receiver detection pattern, but ignores the fact it didn’t feel any receiver at the other end. See below.
  • In dual-clock mode, the switch works even if the main REFCLK is idle, given that the respective lane is unused (needless to say, the other clock must work).
  • Read the errata of the device before picking one. It’s available on PLX’ site on the same page that the Data Book is downloaded.
  • Connect an EEPROM on custom board designs, and be prepared to use it. It’s a lifesaver.

Why receiver detect is an issue

Before attempting to train a lane, the PCIe spec requires the transmitter to check if there is any receiver on the other side. The spec requires that the receiver should have a single-ended impedance of 40-60 Ohm on each of the P/N wires at DC (and a differential impedance of 80-120 Ohms, but that’s not relevant). The transmitter’s single-ended impedance isn’t specified, only the differential impedance must be 80-120. The coupling capacitor may range between 75-200 nF, and is always on the transmitter’s side (this is relevant only when there’s a plug connection between Tx and Rx).

The transmitter performs a receiver detect by creating an upward common mode pulse of up to 600 mV on both lane wires, and measuring the voltage on these.This pulse lasts for 100 us or so. As the time constant for 50 Ohms combined with 100 nF is 5 us, a charging capacitor’s voltage pattern is expected. Note that the common mode impedance of the transmitter is not defined by the spec, but the transmitter’s designer knows it. Either way, if a flat pulse is observed on the lane wires, there’s no receiver sensed.

Now to SFP+ modules: The SFP+ specification requires a nominal 100 Ohm differential impedance on its receivers, but “does not require any common mode termination at the receiver. If common mode terminations are provided, it may reduce common mode voltage and EMI” (SFF-8431, section 3.4). Also, it requires DC-blocking capacitors on both transmitter and receiver lane wires, so there’s some extra capacitance on the PCIe-to-SFP+ direction (where the SFP+ is the PCIe receiver) which is not expected. But the latter issue is negligible compared with the possible absence of common mode termination.

As the common-mode termination on the receiver is optional, some modules may be detected by the PCIe transmitter, and some may not.

This is what one of the PCIe lane’s wires looks like when the PEX8606 switch is set to ignore the absence of receiver (with the SerDes X Mask Receiver Not Detected bit): It still runs the receiver detect test (the large pulse), but then goes to link training despite that no load was detected (that’s the noisy part after the pulse). In the shown case, the training kept failing (no response on the other side), so it goes back and forth between detection and training.

Oscilloscope plot of receiver detect of PLX8606

This capture was done with a plain digital oscilloscope (~ 200 MHz bandwidth).

Reader Comments

Hi, I’m interested in what you did, as I would like to interface FPGAs to a PC’s PCIE bus as well. However, It’s unclear to me what hardware you used – you mention the PEX8606 which is an IC, but where is it actually located? Could you elaborate a bit on the physical hardware setup?

Kind regards,


Written By Daniel on February 1st, 2017 @ 22:39


This post is based upon a project I did on a couple of boards that the client supplied. Both were populated with the PEX8606 and SFP+ transceivers.


Written By eli on February 2nd, 2017 @ 05:03

Add a Comment

required, use real name
required, will not be published
optional, your blog address