[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211125234520.2h6vtwar4hkb2knd@skbuf>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2021 23:45:21 +0000
From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
To: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Po Liu <po.liu@....com>
CC: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Antoine Tenart <atenart@...nel.org>,
"UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com" <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Xiaoliang Yang <xiaoliang.yang_1@....com>,
"Y.B. Lu" <yangbo.lu@....com>, Rui Sousa <rui.sousa@....com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
"Allan W . Nielsen" <allan.nielsen@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/4] Fix broken PTP over IP on Ocelot switches
On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 01:21:14AM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> Po Liu reported recently that timestamping PTP over IPv4 is broken using
> the felix driver on NXP LS1028A. This has been known for a while, of
> course, since it has always been broken. The reason is because IP PTP
> packets are currently treated as unknown IP multicast, which is not
> flooded to the CPU port in the ocelot driver design, so packets don't
> reach the ptp4l program.
>
> The series solves the problem by installing packet traps per port when
> the timestamping ioctl is called, depending on the RX filter selected
> (L2, L4 or both).
>
> Vladimir Oltean (4):
> net: mscc: ocelot: don't downgrade timestamping RX filters in
> SIOCSHWTSTAMP
> net: mscc: ocelot: create a function that replaces an existing VCAP
> filter
> net: ptp: add a definition for the UDP port for IEEE 1588 general
> messages
> net: mscc: ocelot: set up traps for PTP packets
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot.c | 247 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
> drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_vcap.c | 16 ++
> include/linux/ptp_classify.h | 1 +
> include/soc/mscc/ocelot_vcap.h | 2 +
> 4 files changed, 259 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.25.1
>
I don't know why I targeted these patches to "net-next". Habit I guess.
Nonetheless, they apply equally well to "net", can they be considered
for merging there without me resending?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists