From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A30D0C433F5 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:56:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40031400CB; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:56:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 40031400CB DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=osuosl.org; s=default; t=1664459787; bh=BXAtECk6XX6UKaD7N7DDO4cuCO7zmY2v2vjk1NuSKVU=; h=Date:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: Cc:From; b=g0r4ClXERdV/gy3VN233yGu+XzEQK1pfymy9evckQejJmuPvzHmCaVRYldLoFQi2g CYVfslgVkKBzzlNKjMZawGtJqZCUh05PAU3df5SDIOSJpaZ972ylDLg+OEqIsRXUjS 7ZlfDVRulqmcGljYUDYgOug64vIG8QE46pg7wxmWY14YI/tR/zhKXkfsgx+dkM6vYA eK3qUsDYe4/4FLaqYEwLmgLpmmBlof4pdj6R6EFJPG/o89pk6qNT7NC0Nft3siaZY5 bJ/YUa2Bu/BMyaP2fOHUhew4M4gpTjerwd3/XMcxuPPaIWBdXl53iEqLec2XPBLuKv Ea/JNbsNItUrQ== X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ma_JCLsO-IW5; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:56:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ash.osuosl.org (ash.osuosl.org [140.211.166.34]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2F8340275; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:56:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org F2F8340275 Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) by ash.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 607221BF2B4 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:56:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AD5B60BC6 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:56:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 3AD5B60BC6 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rPqtBN7EFoUn for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:56:23 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 0C03C60B77 Received: from sin.source.kernel.org (sin.source.kernel.org [145.40.73.55]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C03C60B77 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:56:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sin.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16663CE21B8; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:56:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DEF16C433D7; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:56:16 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 06:56:15 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: "Zulkifli, Muhammad Husaini" Message-ID: <20220929065615.0a717655@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20220927130656.32567-1-muhammad.husaini.zulkifli@intel.com> <20220927170919.3a1dbcc3@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailman-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1664459777; bh=IZWkitAl8YosjSaE9485+Ts9rzl3eqH6rjc4QjpoN4A=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=G6tA1GhDnbVOPoE6tUOI0ARB6k/YpO9OJ/U1X/nVWM77qvrnhK0sdC5yyv2BUmM08 gAo95DKwjiiqb+mlBSUciUfi+gG9ZR7lXBfkz2vfAOe3y4hQccERC/mRBvnUy5+vMb OrQgy01zJytwjpgVmnCoFzNekZOxsm9U01ZJHsHgYjmW+X3gsGpDwT0mRYQnmA1PSc vZraNuEslZisd9JSoW2IBbyUF+AG32znE3oastoA/D/nUfuHt+e2ZzoeqqNSJ7zrHT LHvP5wf+a/xvrSb2QLXQfZWqmAhEYs1e8HME1wxGv7Ss2SleaxWTE6io4MCaOapSyh mhSUJZbDp0pJA== X-Mailman-Original-Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=G6tA1GhD Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v1 0/4] Add support for DMA timestamp for non-PTP packets X-BeenThere: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel Wired Ethernet Linux Kernel Driver Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "leon@kernel.org" , "intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org" , Richard Cochran , Saeed Mahameed , "edumazet@google.com" , Gal Pressman , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Michael Chan , "davem@davemloft.net" , Andy Gospodarek , "Ahmad Tarmizi, Noor Azura" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: intel-wired-lan-bounces@osuosl.org Sender: "Intel-wired-lan" On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 02:35:29 +0000 Zulkifli, Muhammad Husaini wrote: > > High level tho, are we assuming that the existing HW timestamps are always > > PTP-quality, i.e. captured when SFD crosses the RS layer, or whatnot? I'm > > afraid some NICs already report PCI stamps as the HW ones. > > 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. > According to what I observed, The HW Timestamps will be requested if the application side > specifies tx type = HWTSTAMP TX ON and timestamping flags = SOF TIMESTAMPING TX HARDWARE. > So it depends on how the application used it. > > > So the existing HW stamps are conceptually of "any" type, if we want to be > > 100% sure NIC actually stamps at the PHY we'd need another tx_type to > > express that. > > 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.. > Sorry about the naming here. Just so you know, the DMA timestamp does not > quite match the PTP's level timestamping. The DMA timestamp will be capture when > DMA request to fetch the data from the memory. > > > > > Same story on the Rx - what do you plan to do there? We'll need to configure > > the filters per type, but that's likely to mean two new filters, because the > > current one gives no guarantee. > > Current I225 HW only allow to retrieve the dma time for TX packets only. > So as of now based on our HW, on RX side we just requesting rx filter to timestamps any incoming packets. > We always allocating additional bytes in the packet buffer for the receive packets for timestamp. > It is a 1588 PTP level kind of timestamping accuracy here. I see. I think datacenter NICs can provide DMA stamps for Rx as well. Intel, Mellanox, Broadcom folks, could you confirm if your NIC can do Rx DMA stamps? _______________________________________________ Intel-wired-lan mailing list Intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-wired-lan