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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 12:38:30 +0300 From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com> To: Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de> Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>, Kamil Alkhouri <kamil.alkhouri@...offenburg.de>, ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/8] net: dsa: hellcreek: Add TAPRIO offloading support On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 11:33:53AM +0200, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote: > On Tue Aug 25 2020, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 10:11:15AM +0200, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote: > > > > Explain again how this works, please? The hrtimer measures the CLOCK_TAI > > of the CPU, but you are offloading the CLOCK_TAI domain of the NIC? So > > you are assuming that the CPU and the NIC PHC are synchronized? What if > > they aren't? > > Yes, I assume that's synchronized with e.g. phc2sys. > My intuition tells me that this isn't the user's expectation, and that it should do the right thing even if it's not synchronized to the system clock. > > > > And what if the base-time is in the past, do you deal with that (how > > does the hardware deal with a base-time in the past)? > > A base-time in the past (example: 0) should work: you should advance the > > base-time into the nearest future multiple of the cycle-time, to at > > least preserve phase correctness of the schedule. > > If the hrtimer is programmed with a value in the past, it fires > instantly. Yes, it does. > The callback is executed and the start time is programmed. > With a valid value from the hardware's perspective? Thanks, -Vladimir
Powered by blists - more mailing lists