linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] dt-bindings: net: micrel: Configure latency values and timestamping check for LAN8814 phy

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 8 Mar 2022 19:10:12 +0100
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
Cc:     Divya.Koppera@...rochip.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        hkallweit1@...il.com, linux@...linux.org.uk, davem@...emloft.net,
        kuba@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        richardcochran@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, Madhuri.Sripada@...rochip.com,
        Manohar.Puri@...rochip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] dt-bindings: net: micrel: Configure latency
 values and timestamping check for LAN8814 phy

> > So this is a function of the track length between the MAC and the PHY?
> 
> Nope.
> This latency represents the time it takes for the frame to travel from RJ45
> module to the timestamping unit inside the PHY. To be more precisely,
> the timestamping unit will do the timestamp when it detects the end of
> the start of the frame. So it represents the time from when the frame
> reaches the RJ45 to when the end of start of the frame reaches the
> timestamping unit inside the PHY.

I must be missing something here. How do you measure the latency
difference for a 1 meter cable vs a 100m cable? Does 100m cable plus
1cm of track from the RJ45 to the PHY make a difference compared to
100m cable plus 1.5cm of track? Isn't this error all just in the
noise?

   Andrew