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  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:   Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:07:09 +0200
From:   Miroslav Lichvar <>
To:     Hubert Feurstein <>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <>, netdev <>,
        lkml <>,
        Richard Cochran <>,
        Florian Fainelli <>,
        Heiner Kallweit <>,
        Vladimir Oltean <>,
        "David S. Miller" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/4] net: mdio: add PTP offset compensation
 to mdiobus_write_sts

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 06:56:56PM +0200, Hubert Feurstein wrote:
> Am Di., 20. Aug. 2019 um 17:40 Uhr schrieb Miroslav Lichvar
> > I think a large jitter is ok in this case. We just need to timestamp
> > something that we know for sure happened after the PHC timestamp. It
> > should have no impact on the offset and its stability, just the
> > reported delay. A test with phc2sys should be able to confirm that.
> > phc2sys selects the measurement with the shortest delay, which has
> > least uncertainty. I'd say that applies to both interrupt and polling.
> >
> > If it is difficult to specify the minimum interrupt delay, I'd still
> > prefer an overly pessimistic interval assuming a zero delay.
> >
> Currently I do not see the benefit from this. The original intention was to
> compensate for the remaining offset as good as possible.

That's ok, but IMHO the change should not break the assumptions of
existing application and users.

> The current code
> of phc2sys uses the delay only for the filtering of the measurement record
> with the shortest delay and for reporting and statistics. Why not simple shift
> the timestamps with the offset to the point where we expect the PHC timestamp
> to be captured, and we have a very good result compared to where we came
> from.

Because those reports/statistics are important in calculation of
maximum error. If someone had a requirement for a clock to be accurate
to 1.5 microseconds and the ioctl returned a delay indicating a
sufficient accuracy when in reality it could be worse, that would be a

BTW, phc2sys is not the only user of the ioctl.

Miroslav Lichvar

Powered by blists - more mailing lists