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:   Mon, 18 Jul 2022 11:46:34 -0300
From:   Vinicius Costa Gomes <>
To:     Ferenc Fejes <>,
        "" <>
Cc:     "" <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: igc: missing HW timestamps at TX

Hi Ferenc,

Ferenc Fejes <> writes:

> (Ctrl+Enter'd by mistake)
> My question here: is there anything I can quickly try to avoid that
> behavior? Even when I send only a few (like 10) packets but on fast
> rate (5us between packets) I get missing TX HW timestamps. The receive
> side looks much more roboust, I cannot noticed missing HW timestamps
> there.

There's a limitation in the i225/i226 in the number of "in flight" TX
timestamps they are able to handle. The hardware has 4 sets of registers
to handle timestamps.

There's an aditional issue that the driver as it is right now, only uses
one set of those registers.

I have one only briefly tested series that enables the driver to use the
full set of TX timestamp registers. Another reason that it was not
proposed yet is that I still have to benchmark it and see what is the
performance impact.

If you are feeling adventurous and feel like helping test it, here is
the link:


Powered by blists - more mailing lists