[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160514073002.GA2053@netboy>
Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 09:30:03 +0200
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To: Guy Harris <guy@...m.mit.edu>
Cc: Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: What ixgbe devices support HWTSTAMP_FILTER_ALL for hardware time
stamping?
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 04:12:52PM -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> The Linux implementation currently implements the inquiry by doing a
> ETHTOOL_GET_TS_INFO SIOETHTOOL ioctl and looking at the
> so_timestamping bits, if the linux/ethtool.h header defines
> ETHTOOL_GET_TS_INFO and the ioctl succeeds on the device.
So far, so good.
> This is inadequate - as libpcap requests hardware time stamping for
> all packets, it should also check whether HWTSTAMP_FILTER_ALL is set
> in rx_filters, and only offer hardware time stamping if it's set.
The SO_TIMESTAMPING and SIOCSHWTSTAMP interfaces predate
ETHTOOL_GET_TS_INFO, and they work fine without it. Applications
should simply use SIOCSHWTSTAMP to request the mode that they need and
check the result.
That said, the information in ETHTOOL_GET_TS_INFO should be correct.
> Is it the case that only the ixgbe_mac_X550 and ixgbe_mac_X550EM_x
> controllers support HWTSTAMP_FILTER_ALL?
Looks like it.
> If so, shouldn't ixgbe_get_ts_info() be doing something such as:
> if (adapter->hw.mac.type >= ixgbe_mac_X550)
> info->rx_filters |= (1 << HWTSTAMP_FILTER_ALL);
Yes, probably.
> From a quick scan of drivers/net, it looks as if
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio
>
> also support HWTSTAMP_FILTER_ALL but don't advertise it,
For this and the other drivers you mentioned, their maintainers might
appreciate patches...
Thanks,
Richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists