netdev - Re: net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: no multicasts rx'd after enabling hw time stamping

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:   Thu, 29 Jul 2021 08:22:32 -0500
From:   George McCollister <george.mccollister@...il.com>
To:     Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: no multicasts rx'd after enabling hw time stamping

On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 5:25 PM Richard Cochran
<richardcochran@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 11:04:59PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 03:44:24PM -0500, George McCollister wrote:
> > > If I do the following on one of my mv88e6390 switch ports I stop
> > > receiving multicast frames.
> > > hwstamp_ctl -i lan0 -t 1 -r 12
> > >
> > > Has anyone seen anything like this or have any ideas what might be
> > > going on? Does anyone have PTP working on the mv88e6390?
> > >
> > > I tried this but it doesn't help:
> > > ip maddr add 01:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx dev lan0
> > >
> > > I've tried sending 01:1B:19:00:00:00, 01:80:C2:00:00:0E as well as
> > > other random ll multicast addresses. Nothing gets through once
> > > hardware timestamping is switched on. The switch counters indicate
> > > they're making it into the outward facing switch port but are not
> > > being sent out the CPU facing switch port. I ran into this while
> > > trying to get ptp4l to work.
> >
> > Hi George
> >
> > All my testing was i think on 6352.
>
> Mine, too.  IIRC, the PTP stuff for most (all?) of the other parts was
> added "blindly" into the driver, based on similarity in the data
> sheets.
>
> So maybe 6390 has never been tried?

Thanks for the feedback. The datasheet covers the 88E6390X, 88E6390,
88E6290, 88E6190X, 88E6190 so I expect those work similarly but if
only the 6352 has been tested that could explain it. It certainly
helps to know that I'm working with something that may have never
worked rather than I'm just doing something dumb.

>
> Thanks,
> Richard