From: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2] e1000e: don't modify SYSTIM registers during SIOCSHWTSTAMP ioctl
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 22:29:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1460759352.13811.9.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160415213655.28072-1-jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
On Fri, 2016-04-15 at 14:36 -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
> The e1000e_config_hwtstamp function was incorrectly resetting the
> SYSTIM
> registers every time the ioctl was being run. If you happened to be
> running ptp4l and lost the PTP connect (removing cable, or blocking
> the
> UDP traffic for example), then ptp4l will eventually perform a
> restart
> which involves re-requesting timestamp settings. In e1000e this has
> the
> unfortunate and incorrect result of resetting SYSTIME to the kernel
> time. Since kernel time is usually in UTC, and PTP time is in TAI,
> this
> results in the leap second being re-applied.
>
> Fix this by extracting the SYSTIME reset out into its own function,
> e1000e_ptp_reset, which we call during reset to restore the hardware
> registers. This function will (a) restart the timecounter based on
> the
> new system time, (b) restore the previous PPB setting, and (c)
> restore
> the previous hwtstamp settings.
>
> In order to perform (b), I had to modify the adjfreq ptp function
> pointer to store the old delta each time it is called. This also has
> the
> side effect of restoring the correct base timinca register correctly.
> The driver does not need to explicitly zero the ptp_delta variable
> since
> the entire adapter structure comes zero-initialized.
>
> Reported-by: Brian Walsh <brian@walsh.ws>
> Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
> ---
>
> Notes:
> ????This patch conflicts with Brian's "e1000e fix ptp time reset on
> newtork
> ????interruption", and that patch MUST be removed from the queue
> before applying
> ????this one.
> ????
> ????- Changes since v2
> ????* move e1000e_init_ptp prior to reset so that PTP clock is
> created first
> ????* handle NULL ptp_clock_info gracefully.
This has an obvious mistake. Sorry for the thrash, I'll have a v3 soon.
(with more testing, since I was in a hurry and it bit me)
Regards,
Jake
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-15 22:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-15 21:36 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2] e1000e: don't modify SYSTIM registers during SIOCSHWTSTAMP ioctl Jacob Keller
2016-04-15 22:05 ` kbuild test robot
2016-04-15 22:08 ` kbuild test robot
2016-04-15 22:08 ` kbuild test robot
2016-04-15 22:09 ` Brian Walsh
2016-04-15 22:16 ` Keller, Jacob E
2016-04-15 22:29 ` Keller, Jacob E [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1460759352.13811.9.camel@intel.com \
--to=jacob.e.keller@intel.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox