netdev - Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] Add support for DMA timestamp for non-PTP packets

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 Sep 2022 06:56:15 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     "Zulkifli, Muhammad Husaini" <muhammad.husaini.zulkifli@...el.com>
Cc:     "intel-wired-lan@...osl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...osl.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "Gomes, Vinicius" <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>,
        "Gunasekaran, Aravindhan" <aravindhan.gunasekaran@...el.com>,
        "Ahmad Tarmizi, Noor Azura" <noor.azura.ahmad.tarmizi@...el.com>,
        Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
        Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>,
        "leon@...nel.org" <leon@...nel.org>,
        Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] Add support for DMA timestamp for non-PTP
 packets

On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 02:35:29 +0000 Zulkifli, Muhammad Husaini wrote:
> > High level tho, are we assuming that the existing HW timestamps are always
> > PTP-quality, i.e. captured when SFD crosses the RS layer, or whatnot? I'm
> > afraid some NICs already report PCI stamps as the HW ones.  
> 
> Yes. HW timestamps always can be assume equivalent to PTP quality.
> Could you provide additional information regarding SFD crosses the RS layer?

I mean true PTP timestamps, rather than captured somewhere in the NIC
pipeline or at the DMA engine.

> According to what I observed, The HW Timestamps will be requested if the application side 
> specifies tx type = HWTSTAMP TX ON and timestamping flags = SOF TIMESTAMPING TX HARDWARE.
> So it depends on how the application used it.
> 
> > So the existing HW stamps are conceptually of "any" type, if we want to be
> > 100% sure NIC actually stamps at the PHY we'd need another tx_type to
> > express that.  
> 
> Yes, you're right. Are you suggesting that we add a new tx_type to specify
> Only MAC/PHY timestamp ? Ex. HWTSTAMP_TX_PHY/MAC_ON.

Perhaps we can call them HWTSTAMP_TX_PTP_* ? Was the general time
stamping requirement specified in IEEE 1588 or 802.1 (AS?)? 

Both MAC and PHY can provide the time stamps IIUC, so picking one of
those will not be entirely fortunate. In fact perhaps embedded folks
will use this opportunity to disambiguate the two..

> Sorry about the naming here. Just so you know, the DMA timestamp does not
> quite match the PTP's level timestamping. The DMA timestamp will be capture when
> DMA request to fetch the data from the memory. 
> 
> > 
> > Same story on the Rx - what do you plan to do there? We'll need to configure
> > the filters per type, but that's likely to mean two new filters, because the
> > current one gives no guarantee.  
> 
> Current I225 HW only allow to retrieve the dma time for TX packets only. 
> So as of now based on our HW, on RX side we just requesting rx filter to timestamps any incoming packets.
> We always allocating additional bytes in the packet buffer for the receive packets for timestamp. 
> It is a 1588 PTP level kind of timestamping accuracy here.

I see. I think datacenter NICs can provide DMA stamps for Rx as well.
Intel, Mellanox, Broadcom folks, could you confirm if your NIC can do Rx
DMA stamps?