netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/5] Add functions producing system time given a backing counter value

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1507291444310.3825@nanos>
Date:	Wed, 29 Jul 2015 14:52:16 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc:	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	Christopher Hall <christopher.s.hall@...el.com>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
	john.ronciak@...el.com, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] Add functions producing system time given a backing
 counter value

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 12:19:06PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > I don't know whether we need functionality to convert arbitrary
> > timestamps at all, but if we really need them then they are going to
> > be pretty simple and explicitely not precise for anything else than
> > clock monotonic raw. But that's a different story.
> 
> I think we need that too, and agreed, given NTP anything other than
> MONO_RAW is going to be fuzzy at best.

Yes, but that's a trivial case.
 
> > +static u64 art_to_tsc(u64 cycles)
> > +{
> > +	/* FIXME: This needs 128bit math to work proper */
> > +	return tsc_adjust + (cycles * tsc_numerator) / tsc_denominator;
> 
> Yeah, its really unfortunate its given as a divisor and not a shift.
> That said I think, at least on the initial hardware, its 2, so:
> 
> 	return mul_u64_u32_shr(cycles, tsc_numerator, 1);
> 
> Should do, given that TSC_ADJUST had better be 0.

I don't trust BIOS folks :)

+       u64 tmp, res = tsc_adjust;
+
+       res += (cycles / tsc_denominator) * tsc_numerator;
+       tmp = (cycles % tsc_denominator) * tsc_numerator;
+       res += tmp / tsc_denominator;
+       return res;

That's what I have in my final patch.
 
> > +	do {
> > +		seq = read_seqcount_begin(&tk_core.seq);
> > +		/*
> > +		 * Verify that the correlated clocksoure is related to
> > +		 * the currently installed timekeeper clocksoure
> > +		 */
> > +		if (tk->tkr_mono.clock != crs->related_cs)
> > +			return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > +		/*
> > +		 * Try to get a timestamp from the device.
> > +		 */
> > +		ret = crt->get_ts(crt);
> > +		if (ret)
> > +			return ret;
> > +
> > +		/*
> > +		 * Convert the timestamp to timekeeper clock cycles
> > +		 */
> > +		cycles = crs->convert(crs, crt->system_ts);
> > +
> > +		/* Convert to clock realtime */
> > +		base = ktime_add(tk->tkr_mono.base, tk_core.timekeeper.offs_real);
> > +		nsecs = timekeeping_convert_to_ns(&tk->tkr_mono, cycles);
> > +		crt->system_real = ktime_add_ns(base, nsecs);
> > +
> > +		/* Convert to clock raw monotonic */
> > +		base = tk->tkr_raw.base;
> > +		nsecs = timekeeping_convert_to_ns(&tk->tkr_raw, cycles);
> > +		crt->system_raw = ktime_add_ns(base, nsecs);
> > +
> > +	} while (read_seqcount_retry(&tk_core.seq, seq));
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> 
> This is still fuzzy, right? The hardware ART timestamp could be from
> _before_ the NTP adjust; or the NTP adjust could happen while we do this
> conversion and we'll take the retry loop.

I read the timestamp pair in the loop, so its always consistent.
 
> Any other ART users (buffered ETH frames) the delay will only get
> bigger.

That's a different story and we really can only convert this to
monotonic raw.

Thanks,

	tglx


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html