From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Rahul Rameshbabu <rrameshbabu@nvidia.com>
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>,
John Fraker <jfraker@google.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Praveen Kaligineedi <pkaligineedi@google.com>,
Harshitha Ramamurthy <hramamurthy@google.com>,
Shailend Chand <shailend@google.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Junfeng Guo <junfeng.guo@intel.com>,
Ziwei Xiao <ziweixiao@google.com>,
Jeroen de Borst <jeroendb@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kory.maincent@bootlin.com,
andrew@lunn.ch, richardcochran@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] gve: Correctly report software timestamping capabilities
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 15:31:56 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6616e92cbcca_2bfabf294c5@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240410061928.712ff9a3@kernel.org>
Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Apr 2024 21:40:46 -0700 Rahul Rameshbabu wrote:
> > > My gut tells me we force drivers to set the ethtool op because
> > > while at it they will probably also implement tx stamping.
> >
> > I think the logic should be the other way (in terms of the
> > relationship). A call to skb_tx_timestamp should throw a warning if the
> > driver does not advertise its timestamping capabilities. This way, a
> > naive netdev driver for some lightweight device does not need to worry
> > about this. I agree that anyone implementing tx timestamping should have
> > this operation defined. An skb does not contain any mechanism to
> > reference the driver's ethtool callback. Maybe the right choice is to
> > have a ts capability function registered for each netdev that can be
> > used by the core stack and that powers the ethtool operation as well
> > instead of the existing callback for ethtool?
>
> Adding a check which only need to runs once in the lifetime of
> the driver to the fastpath may be a little awkward. Another option
> would be a sufficiently intelligent grep, which would understand
> which files constitute a driver. At which point grepping for
> the ethtool op and skb_tx_timestamp would be trivial?
Many may not define the flags themselves, but defer this to
ethtool_op_get_ts_info.
A not so much intelligent, but sufficiently ugly, grep indicates
not a a massive amount of many missing entries among ethernet
drivers. But this first attempt is definitely lossy.
$ for symbol in skb_tx_timestamp get_ts_info SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_SOFTWARE ethtool_op_get_ts_info "(SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_SOFTWARE|ethtool_op_get_ts_info)"; do
echo -n "$symbol: ";
for i in `grep -nrIE "$symbol" drivers/net/ethernet/ | awk '{print $1}' | xargs dirname | uniq`; do echo $i; done | wc -l;
done
skb_tx_timestamp: 69
get_ts_info: 66
SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_SOFTWARE: 33
ethtool_op_get_ts_info: 40
(SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_SOFTWARE|ethtool_op_get_ts_info): 59
This does not add up, but that's because some drivers share prefixes,
and some drivers have different paths where one open codes and the
other calls ethtool_op_get_ts_info. Marvell is a good example of both:
$ grep -nrIE '(SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_SOFTWARE|ethtool_op_get_ts_info)' drivers/net/ethernet
/marvell
drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/pxa168_eth.c:1367: .get_ts_info = ethtool_op_get_ts_info,
drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mv643xx_eth.c:1756: .get_ts_info = ethtool_op_get_ts_info,
drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2_main.c:5266: info->so_timestamping = SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_SOFTWARE |
drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_ethtool.c:962: return ethtool_op_get_ts_info(netdev, info);
drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_ethtool.c:964: info->so_timestamping = SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_SOFTWARE |
One more aside, no driver should have to advertise
SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE or SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RAW_HARDWARE. Per
Documentation/networking/timestamping.rst these are reporting flags,
not recording flags. Devices only optionall record a timestamp.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-10 19:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-08 18:09 [PATCH net-next] gve: Correctly report software timestamping capabilities John Fraker
2024-04-09 14:29 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-04-10 0:28 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-04-10 4:40 ` Rahul Rameshbabu
2024-04-10 13:19 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-04-10 19:31 ` Willem de Bruijn [this message]
2024-04-11 0:40 ` Rahul Rameshbabu
2024-04-11 1:36 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-04-10 0:26 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-04-11 3:22 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-04-11 19:37 ` John Fraker
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=6616e92cbcca_2bfabf294c5@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch \
--to=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hramamurthy@google.com \
--cc=jeroendb@google.com \
--cc=jfraker@google.com \
--cc=junfeng.guo@intel.com \
--cc=kory.maincent@bootlin.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pkaligineedi@google.com \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=rrameshbabu@nvidia.com \
--cc=shailend@google.com \
--cc=willemb@google.com \
--cc=ziweixiao@google.com \
/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