From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 692A3280CF1 for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2025 09:22:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756113781; cv=none; b=uLQCsHHTB3HUeEzH1Tb7Cq/Gbccknb9Lz9BnMcBrnk742xkdPRliGFxW4Sxm/FvcsLPuKjhyJmioGE3nUbnzqnyWk6y09NPkXOl45OzC54Pun4zRN5coOMjmh6Q2sl4IeMyeI1pu5QDoYKOcujty5qHA2DOTT28ApRjeJbtnogg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756113781; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OldsM0mTe0gUZlhTr/mMd3s5ex5qEiHcv6VNhYROMGQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=mXDEqtgPG4raLy8S7zLGhXH3gWdeHop1Js6sDzMMeqsY+FIU/jW8ukVr871O8eOBpTzhSiq1Xpa3Sc+Et6vWrIPhjVH5Q9ZS6MW1OMHckiLWbAyTBA1zUY6U5NAaEQl60B4uhtnWYwpiVorVKUJabVVEtF+R3GWgTWfl9C86uLc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=XGt0pugQ; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=46EqGMpo; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="XGt0pugQ"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="46EqGMpo" From: Kurt Kanzenbach DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1756113776; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=OldsM0mTe0gUZlhTr/mMd3s5ex5qEiHcv6VNhYROMGQ=; b=XGt0pugQksHOTwpSgow0iV5dMvEriijJXSVyT5cmhLpalpOYBZ4L18xluXdzNq8rpxIRzH VVcuu2BBdpNxVpKT8uqfo733AyiGVK7YsOdLQdJCIllLhMm3BB43tvqpa93Itrgv7ThtBE YNRxRCPAQcCnbcGIXynbljUxqcVfVu3s7zNrc7h9coYGIF2gMREODnxwDjJgg28UbkQWnY P0h6N/DLd8IcTkGi0k5YUG5Tpo6S/7aRE20bOjzGsTEzg71vjWfp4G5pvqdLRqgg7c+gl2 MtwLRLEa8mQvG+kp7pA8DYd30XOUh87MqbBxBV1J4Iwy7KPHaTutx4hwBD98iQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1756113776; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=OldsM0mTe0gUZlhTr/mMd3s5ex5qEiHcv6VNhYROMGQ=; b=46EqGMpoRP9YtsfP5Z5aq8RqQVNc2MIqjGwToDZkSZeJZNVAr/hdm0j6UIsYDvwi0Awaqp qWoMpRS+xf+7ihCw== To: Miroslav Lichvar Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Tony Nguyen , Przemek Kitszel , Andrew Lunn , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Richard Cochran , Vinicius Costa Gomes , Paul Menzel , Vadim Fedorenko , Jacob Keller , intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-next v2] igb: Convert Tx timestamping to PTP aux worker In-Reply-To: References: <20250822-igb_irq_ts-v2-1-1ac37078a7a4@linutronix.de> <20250822075200.L8_GUnk_@linutronix.de> <87ldna7axr.fsf@jax.kurt.home> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2025 11:22:55 +0200 Message-ID: <87o6s3oivk.fsf@jax.kurt.home> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain On Mon Aug 25 2025, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > On Sat, Aug 23, 2025 at 09:29:36AM +0200, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote: >> Also I couldn't really see a performance degradation with ntpperf. > > I was testing with an I350, not I210. Could that make a difference? Jup, it could make a difference. > >> In my >> tests the IRQ variant reached an equal or higher rate. But sometimes I >> get 'Could not send requests at rate X'. No idea what that means. > > That's ntpperf giving up as the HW is too slow to send requests at > that rate (with a single process calling sendmmsg() in a loop). You > can add the -l option to force ntpperf to continue, but the printed > rate values will no longer be accurate, you would need to measure it > by some other way, e.g. by monitoring the interface packet counters. I see. Thanks, Kurt --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJHBAEBCgAxFiEEvLm/ssjDfdPf21mSwZPR8qpGc4IFAmisK28THGt1cnRAbGlu dXRyb25peC5kZQAKCRDBk9HyqkZzgu1rD/9qUKqoJzxPjCwmyM7a0nf/OU96P6av LtDv0y6jPOr/Mf62KBqI228u8HfdTxSyXV6gfuKG+xcklnwdkH5SeHHTYVIYzmIb tIuoswVSL7CXj6+/GtUxGq3kK4MQIFiR6Qc/Gtz/v7r4HpPSW5NT0e5nmypL4APj ic185xMi63zaoWBrSpLviaMh2piTyYHI5mOW0EwVPDAQ3Zu6kKXjJUHvxH++Y99y jXv2QJGooEEboDMweJaL1vLlx9q/f7xFBABLXHnBXhdy1kFMGHr5c0eNmuAoHqU8 zdGus1oVrdUby/7n1Dp64tgQ3ZSG/meCF+aKTlpdTdHs7ikhFH6t0JJYvEg53QH5 QkIKEAgH6j4Dz5BkqUb7C1gXB+OFJ1xuTJ35Wpf0/OqM2xxm2SQVFnvitDdvarW2 lqI/CciQaSuL+nEwjGF7Hh9jC6ElLhffXrK9EyyvsTee4qhuv5xH+czHISPk8/3o YfelX4qlAhQ6fqlzgGvn+ka+XS3Zl6KpZfvMoUCL8granrq++8YjAfsKkkjkBVCE z9TGkAViao0ktKkYgFk19htzNx2xXx192V3kD/K3/CQ5T4bwasAqbimkovG2YwYe nxtwgkf7AfbpLty6aosF4q8ZAu4rHEOW+Z/2iDn0OfP7pIeSWmlI6ReJ4/zUREH4 rcSt3nhUPrrpQg== =rszz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--