Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v1 0/4] Add support for DMA timestamp for non-PTP packets

From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: "Zulkifli, Muhammad Husaini" <muhammad.husaini.zulkifli@intel.com>
Cc: "leon@kernel.org" <leon@kernel.org>,
	"intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
	Saeed Mahameed <saeed@kernel.org>,
	"edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
	Gal Pressman <gal@nvidia.com>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Michael Chan <michael.chan@broadcom.com>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse.net>,
	"Ahmad Tarmizi, Noor Azura" <noor.azura.ahmad.tarmizi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v1 0/4] Add support for DMA timestamp for non-PTP packets
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 07:40:16 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220930074016.295cbfab@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <SJ1PR11MB61808A055419C257F6B653CCB8569@SJ1PR11MB6180.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 08:52:38 +0000 Zulkifli, Muhammad Husaini wrote:
> > > Yes. HW timestamps always can be assume equivalent to PTP quality.
> > > Could you provide additional information regarding SFD crosses the RS  
> > > layer?
> > 
> > I mean true PTP timestamps, rather than captured somewhere in the NIC
> > pipeline or at the DMA engine.  
> 
> When SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_HARDWARE is been used, we guaranteed a PTP quality
> Timestamps (timestamp capture when packet leave the wire upon sensing the SFD).
> As of SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_HARDWARE_DMA_FETCH, it is not a PTP quality because
> the HW timestamp reported in this case, is a time when the data is
> DMA'ed into the NIC packet buffer.

I understand that _your_ device does it right.
But there are vendors out there who treat SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_HARDWARE
as your new SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_HARDWARE_DMA_FETCH.

> > > Yes, you're right. Are you suggesting that we add a new tx_type to
> > > specify Only MAC/PHY timestamp ? Ex. HWTSTAMP_TX_PHY/MAC_ON.  
> > 
> > Perhaps we can call them HWTSTAMP_TX_PTP_* ? Was the general time
> > stamping requirement specified in IEEE 1588 or 802.1 (AS?)?
> > 
> > Both MAC and PHY can provide the time stamps IIUC, so picking one of those
> > will not be entirely fortunate. In fact perhaps embedded folks will use this
> > opportunity to disambiguate the two..  
> 
> With the help of SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_HARDWARE, we will get the 
> PHY level timestamp(PTP quality) while using SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_HARDWARE_DMA_FETCH,
> we will get the timestamp at a point in the NIC pipeline.
> 
> Linuxptp application uses SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_HARDWARE for their socket option.
> And this can guarantee a PTP quality timestamp. 
> 
> Can we just use a SOF_TIMESTAMPING to identify which timestamp that we want rather 
> than creating a new tx_type?

Hm, perhaps, yes, we can stick to that.
_______________________________________________
Intel-wired-lan mailing list
Intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-wired-lan