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:   Sun, 2 Jul 2023 15:20:39 +0300
From:   "Farber, Eliav" <farbere@...zon.com>
To:     Rodolfo Giometti <giometti@...eenne.com>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     <ronenk@...zon.com>, <talel@...zon.com>, <hhhawa@...zon.com>,
        <jonnyc@...zon.com>, <itamark@...zon.com>, <shellykz@...zon.com>,
        <amitlavi@...zon.com>, <almogbs@...zon.com>, <farbere@...zon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] pps: add pulse-width calculation in nsec

On 6/27/2023 5:27 PM, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
> On 25/06/23 16:21, Eliav Farber wrote:
>> This change adds PPS pulse-width calculation in nano seconds.
>> Width time can be calculated for both assert time and reset time.
>>
>> Calculation can be done only if capture ASSERT and capture CLEAR modes
>> are both enabled.
>>
>> Assert width is calculated as:
>>    clear-time - assert-time
>> and clear width is calculated as:
>>    assert-time - clear-time
>>
>> Read-only sysfs were added to get the last pulse-width time and event
>> sequence.
>> Examples:
>>   * cat /sys/class/pps/pps0/pulse_width_assert
>>     20001450#85
>>   * cat /sys/class/pps/pps1/pulse_width_clear
>>     979893314#16
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eliav Farber <farbere@...zon.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/pps/kapi.c         | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   drivers/pps/pps.c          |  9 +++++++
>>   drivers/pps/sysfs.c        | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   include/linux/pps_kernel.h |  3 +++
>>   include/uapi/linux/pps.h   | 19 +++++++++++++++
>>   5 files changed, 110 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pps/kapi.c b/drivers/pps/kapi.c
>> index d9d566f70ed1..deeecfc0a3ee 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pps/kapi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pps/kapi.c
>> @@ -82,6 +82,14 @@ struct pps_device *pps_register_source(struct 
>> pps_source_info *info,
>>               goto pps_register_source_exit;
>>       }
>>
>> +     if ((info->mode & PPS_WIDTHBOTH) &&
>> +         ((info->mode & PPS_CAPTUREBOTH) != PPS_CAPTUREBOTH)) {
>> +             pr_err("%s: width can't be calculated without both 
>> captures (mode = 0x%x)\n",
>> +                    info->name, info->mode);
>> +             err = -EINVAL;
>> +             goto pps_register_source_exit;
>> +     }
>
> See the comment below where you define PPS_WIDTHBOTH.
>
>>       /* Allocate memory for the new PPS source struct */
>>       pps = kzalloc(sizeof(struct pps_device), GFP_KERNEL);
>>       if (pps == NULL) {
>> @@ -143,6 +151,39 @@ void pps_unregister_source(struct pps_device *pps)
>>   }
>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL(pps_unregister_source);
>>
>> +static u64 pps_ktime_sub(struct pps_ktime *ts1, struct pps_ktime *ts2)
>> +{
>> +     if (ts1->sec == ts2->sec)
>> +             return (ts1->nsec > ts2->nsec) ? (ts1->nsec - 
>> ts2->nsec) : (ts2->nsec - ts1->nsec);
>> +
>> +     if (ts1->sec > ts2->sec)
>> +             return (ts1->sec - ts2->sec) * NSEC_PER_SEC + ts1->nsec 
>> - ts2->nsec;
>> +
>> +     return (ts2->sec - ts1->sec) * NSEC_PER_SEC + ts2->nsec - 
>> ts1->nsec;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void pps_calc_clear_width(struct pps_device *pps)
>> +{
>> +     if (pps->clear_sequence == 0)
>> +             return;
>> +
>> +     pps->clear_width.sequence++;
>
> I don't understand the meaning of this field... regarding assert and 
> clear it
> states the n-th sample but in this case...? Why do you need it?

For assert and clear, the sequence parameter is basically the counter
of assert/clear events.
Similarly, I wanted to have a counter for the number of pulses which
there width was counted.
The sequence was used by me in the sysfs to show the pulse counter and
pulse width in nano-seconds.
Will counter make more sense instead of sequence?
Initially, I used the assert_sequence and clear_sequence as the pulse
counter, but there were few cases to handle.
In case first interrupt happened during a pulse, then
assert_sequence != clear_sequence, but if not then
assert_sequence == clear_sequence.
So I preferred to add an new independent value.

>> +     pps->clear_width.nsec = pps_ktime_sub(&pps->assert_tu, 
>> &pps->clear_tu);
>> +     dev_dbg(pps->dev, "PPS clear width = %llu#%u\n",
>> +             pps->clear_width.nsec, pps->clear_width.sequence);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void pps_calc_assert_width(struct pps_device *pps)
>> +{
>> +     if (pps->assert_sequence == 0)
>> +             return;
>> +
>> +     pps->assert_width.sequence++;
>
> Ditto.
>
>> +     pps->assert_width.nsec = pps_ktime_sub(&pps->clear_tu, 
>> &pps->assert_tu);
>> +     dev_dbg(pps->dev, "PPS assert width = %llu#%u\n",
>> +             pps->assert_width.nsec, pps->assert_width.sequence);
>> +}
>> +
>>   /* pps_event - register a PPS event into the system
>>    * @pps: the PPS device
>>    * @ts: the event timestamp
>> @@ -191,6 +232,10 @@ void pps_event(struct pps_device *pps, struct 
>> pps_event_time *ts, int event,
>>               dev_dbg(pps->dev, "capture assert seq #%u\n",
>>                       pps->assert_sequence);
>>
>> +             /* Calculate clear pulse-width */
>> +             if (pps->params.mode & PPS_WIDTHCLEAR)
>> +                     pps_calc_clear_width(pps);
>> +
>>               captured = ~0;
>>       }
>>       if (event & pps->params.mode & PPS_CAPTURECLEAR) {
>> @@ -205,6 +250,10 @@ void pps_event(struct pps_device *pps, struct 
>> pps_event_time *ts, int event,
>>               dev_dbg(pps->dev, "capture clear seq #%u\n",
>>                       pps->clear_sequence);
>>
>> +             /* Calculate assert pulse-width */
>> +             if (pps->params.mode & PPS_WIDTHASSERT)
>> +                     pps_calc_assert_width(pps);
>> +
>>               captured = ~0;
>>       }
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pps/pps.c b/drivers/pps/pps.c
>> index 5d19baae6a38..8299a272af11 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pps/pps.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pps/pps.c
>> @@ -195,6 +195,11 @@ static long pps_cdev_ioctl(struct file *file,
>>               fdata.info.clear_tu = pps->clear_tu;
>>               fdata.info.current_mode = pps->current_mode;
>>
>> +             memcpy(&fdata.info.assert_width, &pps->assert_width,
>> +                    sizeof(struct pps_kwidth));
>> +             memcpy(&fdata.info.clear_width, &pps->clear_width,
>> +                    sizeof(struct pps_kwidth));
>> +
>>               spin_unlock_irq(&pps->lock);
>>
>>               err = copy_to_user(uarg, &fdata, sizeof(struct 
>> pps_fdata));
>> @@ -283,6 +288,10 @@ static long pps_cdev_compat_ioctl(struct file 
>> *file,
>>                               sizeof(struct pps_ktime_compat));
>>               memcpy(&compat.info.clear_tu, &pps->clear_tu,
>>                               sizeof(struct pps_ktime_compat));
>> +             memcpy(&compat.info.assert_width, &pps->assert_width,
>> +                    sizeof(struct pps_kwidth_compat));
>> +             memcpy(&compat.info.clear_width, &pps->clear_width,
>> +                    sizeof(struct pps_kwidth_compat));
>>
>>               spin_unlock_irq(&pps->lock);
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pps/sysfs.c b/drivers/pps/sysfs.c
>> index 134bc33f6ad0..3e34de77dba6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pps/sysfs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pps/sysfs.c
>> @@ -79,6 +79,34 @@ static ssize_t path_show(struct device *dev, 
>> struct device_attribute *attr,
>>   }
>>   static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(path);
>>
>> +static ssize_t pulse_width_assert_show(struct device *dev,
>> +                                    struct device_attribute *attr,
>> +                                    char *buf)
>> +{
>> +     struct pps_device *pps = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>> +
>> +     if (!(pps->info.mode & PPS_WIDTHASSERT))
>> +             return 0;
>> +
>> +     return sprintf(buf, "%llu#%u\n",
>> +                    pps->assert_width.nsec, 
>> pps->assert_width.sequence);
>> +}
>> +static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(pulse_width_assert);
>> +
>> +static ssize_t pulse_width_clear_show(struct device *dev,
>> +                                   struct device_attribute *attr,
>> +                                   char *buf)
>> +{
>> +     struct pps_device *pps = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>> +
>> +     if (!(pps->info.mode & PPS_WIDTHCLEAR))
>> +             return 0;
>> +
>> +     return sprintf(buf, "%llu#%u\n",
>> +                    pps->clear_width.nsec, pps->clear_width.sequence);
>> +}
>> +static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(pulse_width_clear);
>> +
>>   static struct attribute *pps_attrs[] = {
>>       &dev_attr_assert.attr,
>>       &dev_attr_clear.attr,
>> @@ -86,6 +114,8 @@ static struct attribute *pps_attrs[] = {
>>       &dev_attr_echo.attr,
>>       &dev_attr_name.attr,
>>       &dev_attr_path.attr,
>> +     &dev_attr_pulse_width_assert.attr,
>> +     &dev_attr_pulse_width_clear.attr,
>>       NULL,
>>   };
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/pps_kernel.h b/include/linux/pps_kernel.h
>> index 78c8ac4951b5..15f2338095c6 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/pps_kernel.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/pps_kernel.h
>> @@ -51,6 +51,9 @@ struct pps_device {
>>       struct pps_ktime clear_tu;
>>       int current_mode;                       /* PPS mode at event 
>> time */
>>
>> +     struct pps_kwidth assert_width;         /* PPS assert 
>> pulse-width time and event seq # */
>> +     struct pps_kwidth clear_width;          /* PPS clear 
>> pulse-width time and event seq # */
>> +
>>       unsigned int last_ev;                   /* last PPS event id */
>>       wait_queue_head_t queue;                /* PPS event queue */
>>
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/pps.h b/include/uapi/linux/pps.h
>> index 009ebcd8ced5..dd93dac0afc1 100644
>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/pps.h
>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/pps.h
>> @@ -64,12 +64,24 @@ struct pps_ktime_compat {
>>   } __attribute__((packed, aligned(4)));
>>   #define PPS_TIME_INVALID    (1<<0)  /* used to specify 
>> timeout==NULL */
>>
>> +struct pps_kwidth {
>> +     __u64 nsec;
>> +     __u32 sequence;
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct pps_kwidth_compat {
>> +     __u64 nsec;
>> +     __u32 sequence;
>> +} __attribute__((packed, aligned(4)));
>
> Why do you need a new type? Since both assert_width and clear_width 
> are time
> quantities as far as assert_tu and clear_tu, they can be of the same 
> type, can't
> they? Or, at least they can simply be __u64 since having an 
> assert_width or
> clear_width longer than 1 second is a non-sense...

For each pulse I wanted to save width in nsec (without sec) and
counter.
I need it twice for both assert and clear, hence I added a new
structure for it.

>>   struct pps_kinfo {
>>       __u32 assert_sequence;          /* seq. num. of assert event */
>>       __u32 clear_sequence;           /* seq. num. of clear event */
>>       struct pps_ktime assert_tu;     /* time of assert event */
>>       struct pps_ktime clear_tu;      /* time of clear event */
>>       int current_mode;               /* current mode bits */
>> +     struct pps_kwidth assert_width; /* assert pulse-width time and 
>> seq. num. */
>> +     struct pps_kwidth clear_width;  /* clear pulse-width time and 
>> seq. num. */
>>   };
>
> Altering this structure may break userspace code... also rfc2783 at 
> section-3.2
> states that:
>
>    The API defines these new data structures:
>
>       typedef struct {
>           pps_seq_t   assert_sequence;        /* assert event seq # */
>           pps_seq_t   clear_sequence;         /* clear event seq # */
>           pps_timeu_t assert_tu;
>           pps_timeu_t clear_tu;
>           int         current_mode;           /* current mode bits */
>       } pps_info_t;
>
> So, I'm not willing to change this structure just to add this new data 
> that I
> don't even know where it's used...
>
> If you just read these information via sysfs, please drop these part.

ACK. I'll drop this part.

>>   struct pps_kinfo_compat {
>> @@ -78,6 +90,8 @@ struct pps_kinfo_compat {
>>       struct pps_ktime_compat assert_tu;      /* time of assert event */
>>       struct pps_ktime_compat clear_tu;       /* time of clear event */
>>       int current_mode;                       /* current mode bits */
>> +     struct pps_kwidth_compat assert_width;  /* assert pulse-width 
>> time and seq. num. */
>> +     struct pps_kwidth_compat clear_width;   /* clear pulse-width 
>> time and seq. num. */
>>   };
>>
>>   struct pps_kparams {
>> @@ -96,6 +110,11 @@ struct pps_kparams {
>>   #define PPS_CAPTURECLEAR    0x02    /* capture clear events */
>>   #define PPS_CAPTUREBOTH             0x03    /* capture assert and 
>> clear events */
>>
>> +/* Pulse-width calculation */
>> +#define PPS_WIDTHASSERT              0x04    /* calculate assert 
>> width */
>> +#define PPS_WIDTHCLEAR               0x08    /* calculate clear 
>> width */
>> +#define PPS_WIDTHBOTH                0x0c    /* calculate assert and 
>> clear width */
>> +
>
> I don't understand why a process should ask for just PPS_WIDTHASSERT or
> PPS_WIDTHCLEAR... I think you can avoid defining these values and just 
> enabling
> pulse width calculation when both assert and clear events are available. 

ACK. I'll drop the new defines and enable width calculation when
PPS_CAPTUREASSERT and PPS_CAPTURECLEAR are both defined.

>>   #define PPS_OFFSETASSERT    0x10    /* apply compensation for 
>> assert event */
>>   #define PPS_OFFSETCLEAR             0x20    /* apply compensation 
>> for clear event */
>
> However, the real point is: since an userpsace program can retrieve 
> the time of
> assert and clear events, why it cannot compute the pulses width by 
> itself? :)

The userpsace program can retrieve the time of assert and clear events,
but it is not always clear how to compute it.
Initially that was how I did it:
Read both times, make sure sequence of both times was identical, and
then compute: clear_time – assert_time.
But as I mentioned, when using wide pulses, it might be that when
driver starts, it is a the middle of a pulse.
In that case clear_time will be captured first (seq #1).
Then assert_time is captured (seq #1).
However, assert pulse width can only be calculated for the second
clear-time sequence and first assert-time sequence.
So to simplify this for the user, I added the calculation to the
driver.
Hope this was clear.
Please let me know if this satisfies you, and then I’ll share a second
version of patches which fixes all the other comments you gave.

---
Regards, Eliav

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ