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 vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C3C8C04FDE for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2022 14:50:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230059AbiLIOuP (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Dec 2022 09:50:15 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39160 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229934AbiLIOtv (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Dec 2022 09:49:51 -0500 Received: from esa.microchip.iphmx.com (esa.microchip.iphmx.com [68.232.154.123]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2430B801CE; Fri, 9 Dec 2022 06:49:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=microchip.com; i=@microchip.com; q=dns/txt; s=mchp; t=1670597376; x=1702133376; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=YUXAzZaiIHP+TeJDcIUQIh8idIpiiNMmvl01maD+8eY=; b=Cse/+WQqoA+jUhE37jUbCo/YvADagjzV3GEDovT3Dlchhl9lFlbOfABz drwMaebL6D8U3veR7yz7pcC9oXGQCtwXupZR6nXxb/V26OXrQr7zxw8Yy r0b9w3tAjPNM3tqIhAoLiQYUWH3C+QQWMX7UBeSl8EvpDOdgJ4MEDmyuw r2K8naCBihZbIsVOpyVga7OQynHuT460WiqNPM/+OOa5R99ODPP0WulaP oVezIPir8pMWZyo7L+7qF0pW0Iw3fb7aDTYjMz3+c30Tzr8iqcACyQ0pF dubsc/rhOageeMARL5ApnoA3tYlhE0CuC8EHsJ8iZ19pk65pv7aoGfDg6 g==; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,230,1665471600"; d="scan'208";a="187394902" Received: from unknown (HELO email.microchip.com) ([170.129.1.10]) by esa4.microchip.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA256; 09 Dec 2022 07:49:35 -0700 Received: from chn-vm-ex04.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.152) by chn-vm-ex02.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.12; Fri, 9 Dec 2022 07:49:29 -0700 Received: from localhost (10.10.115.15) by chn-vm-ex04.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.1.2507.12 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 9 Dec 2022 07:49:29 -0700 Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2022 15:54:36 +0100 From: Horatiu Vultur To: Michael Walle CC: Vladimir Oltean , , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 4/4] net: lan966x: Add ptp trap rules Message-ID: <20221209145436.o5nclzrtu2eztvzs@soft-dev3-1> References: <20221208130444.xshazhpg4e2utvjs@soft-dev3-1> <20221209092904.asgka7zttvdtijub@soft-dev3-1> <20221209125857.yhsqt4nj5kmavhmc@soft-dev3-1> <20221209125611.m5cp3depjigs7452@skbuf> <20221209142058.ww7aijhsr76y3h2t@soft-dev3-1> <287d650a96aaac34ac2f31c6735a9ecc@walle.cc> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <287d650a96aaac34ac2f31c6735a9ecc@walle.cc> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org The 12/09/2022 15:23, Michael Walle wrote: > > Am 2022-12-09 15:20, schrieb Horatiu Vultur: > > The 12/09/2022 15:05, Michael Walle wrote: > > > > > > Am 2022-12-09 13:56, schrieb Vladimir Oltean: > > > > On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 01:58:57PM +0100, Horatiu Vultur wrote: > > > > > > Does it also work out of the box with the following patch if > > > > > > the interface is part of a bridge or do you still have to do > > > > > > the tc magic from above? > > > > > > > > > > You will still need to enable the TCAM using the tc command to have it > > > > > working when the interface is part of the bridge. > > > > > > > > FWIW, with ocelot (same VCAP mechanism), PTP traps work out of the box, > > > > no need to use tc. Same goes for ocelot-8021q, which also uses the > > > > VCAP. > > > > I wouldn't consider forcing the user to add any tc command in order for > > > > packet timestamping to work properly. > > > > On ocelot, the vcap is enabled at port initialization, while on other > > platforms(lan966x and sparx5) you have the option to enable or disable. > > > > > > > > +1 > > > Esp. because there is no warning. I.e. I tried this patch while > > > the interface was added on a bridge and there was no error > > > whatsoever. > > > > What error/warning were you expecting to see here? > > Scrap that. ptp4l is reporting an error in case the device is part > of a bridge: > Jan 1 02:33:04 buildroot user.info syslog: [9184.261] driver rejected > most general HWTSTAMP filter > > Nevertheless, from a users POV I'd just expect it to work. How > would I know what I need to do here? What about a warning in the driver? Say that the vcap needs to be enabled. > > -michael -- /Horatiu