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, 28 May 2019 21:52:07 -0700
From:   Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc:     f.fainelli@...il.com, vivien.didelot@...il.com, andrew@...n.ch,
        davem@...emloft.net, john.stultz@...aro.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        sboyd@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/5] PTP support for the SJA1105 DSA driver

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 02:56:22AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> Not all is rosy, though.

You can sure say that again!
 
> PTP timestamping will only work when the ports are bridged. Otherwise,
> the metadata follow-up frames holding RX timestamps won't be received
> because they will be blocked by the master port's MAC filter. Linuxptp
> tries to put the net device in ALLMULTI/PROMISC mode,

Untrue.

> but DSA doesn't
> pass this on to the master port, which does the actual reception.
> The master port is put in promiscous mode when the slave ports are
> enslaved to a bridge.
> 
> Also, even with software-corrected timestamps, one can observe a
> negative path delay reported by linuxptp:
> 
> ptp4l[55.600]: master offset          8 s2 freq  +83677 path delay     -2390
> ptp4l[56.600]: master offset         17 s2 freq  +83688 path delay     -2391
> ptp4l[57.601]: master offset          6 s2 freq  +83682 path delay     -2391
> ptp4l[58.601]: master offset         -1 s2 freq  +83677 path delay     -2391
> 
> Without investigating too deeply, this appears to be introduced by the
> correction applied by linuxptp to t4 (t4c: corrected master rxtstamp)
> during the path delay estimation process (removing the correction makes
> the path delay positive).

No.  The root cause is the time stamps delivered by the hardware or
your driver.  That needs to be addressed before going forward.

Thanks,
Richard

Powered by blists - more mailing lists