netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>
To: Richard Cochran <rcochran@linutronix.de>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Andre Guedes <andre.guedes@intel.com>,
	Henrik Austad <henrik@austad.us>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Jesus Sanchez-Palencia <jesus.sanchez-palencia@intel.com>,
	intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@linutronix.de>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 0/6] Time based packet transmission
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 16:43:02 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170919144302.GB4347@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1505719061.git.rcochran@linutronix.de>

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 09:41:15AM +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> This series is an early RFC that introduces a new socket option
> allowing time based transmission of packets.  This option will be
> useful in implementing various real time protocols over Ethernet,
> including but not limited to P802.1Qbv, which is currently finding
> its way into 802.1Q.

If I understand it correctly, this also allows us to make a PTP/NTP
"one-step" clock with HW that doesn't support it directly.

> * Open questions about SO_TXTIME semantics
> 
>   - What should the kernel do if the dialed Tx time is in the past?
>     Should the packet be sent ASAP, or should we throw an error?

Dropping the packet with an error would make more sense to me.

>   - What should the timescale be for the dialed Tx time?  Should the
>     kernel select UTC when using the SW Qdisc and the HW time
>     otherwise?  Or should the socket option include a clockid_t?

I think for applications that don't (want to) bind their socket to a
specific interface it would be useful if the cmsg specified clockid_t
or maybe if_index. If the packet would be sent using a different
PHC/interface, it should be dropped.

>   |         | plain preempt_rt |     so_txtime | txtime @ 250 us |
>   |---------+------------------+---------------+-----------------|
>   | min:    |    +1.940800e+04 | +4.720000e+02 |   +4.720000e+02 |
>   | max:    |    +7.556000e+04 | +5.680000e+02 |   +5.760000e+02 |
>   | pk-pk:  |    +5.615200e+04 | +9.600000e+01 |   +1.040000e+02 |
>   | mean:   |    +3.292776e+04 | +5.072274e+02 |   +5.073602e+02 |
>   | stddev: |    +6.514709e+03 | +1.310849e+01 |   +1.507144e+01 |
>   | count:  |           600000 |        600000 |         2400000 |
> 
>   Using so_txtime, the peak to peak jitter is about 100 nanoseconds,

Nice!

-- 
Miroslav Lichvar

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-09-19 14:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-09-18  7:41 [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 0/6] Time based packet transmission Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41 ` [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 1/6] net: Add a new socket option for a future transmit time Richard Cochran
2017-09-18 14:50   ` Richard Cochran
2017-09-18 15:18   ` Eric Dumazet
2017-09-18  7:41 ` [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 2/6] net: skbuff: Add a field to support time based transmission Richard Cochran
2017-09-18 15:14   ` Eric Dumazet
2017-09-18  7:41 ` [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 3/6] net: ipv4: raw: Hook into " Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41 ` [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 4/6] net: ipv4: udp: " Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41 ` [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 5/6] net: packet: " Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41 ` [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 6/6] net: igb: Implement " Richard Cochran
2017-09-18 16:34 ` [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 0/6] Time based packet transmission David Miller
2017-12-05 21:22   ` Vinicius Costa Gomes
2017-09-19 14:43 ` Miroslav Lichvar [this message]
2017-09-19 16:46   ` Richard Cochran
2017-09-20 17:35 ` levipearson
2017-09-20 20:11   ` Richard Cochran
2017-10-18 22:18 ` Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
2017-10-19 20:44   ` Richard Cochran

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=20170919144302.GB4347@localhost \
    --to=mlichvar@redhat.com \
    --cc=andre.guedes@intel.com \
    --cc=anna-maria@linutronix.de \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=henrik@austad.us \
    --cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
    --cc=jesus.sanchez-palencia@intel.com \
    --cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rcochran@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).