netdev - Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] igb: Fix extts capture value format for 82580/i354/i350

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <15af2a2f-2235-b9c5-b104-a09836f11dd9@molgen.mpg.de>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2023 08:14:14 +0200
From: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
To: Egg Car <eggcar.luan@...il.com>
Cc: jesse.brandeburg@...el.com, anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com,
 davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
 pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] igb: Fix extts capture value format for
 82580/i354/i350


Dear Egg,


Thank you for your reply.

Am 01.06.23 um 07:55 schrieb egg car:

>> It’d be great, if you added a paragraph how to reproduce the
>> issue.
> 
> I have tested an i350 NIC with a 1PPS signal input to a SDP pin,
> running 'ts2phc' program from linuxptp project, and found that the
> 1PPS timestamps reading out are raw register value in resolution of
> 1ns and a maximum range of 2^40 ns, thus about 1099 s. It was
> supposed to be in TAI timestamp format.
> 
> Sorry I'm new to kernel development, should I make a new patch to add
> a paragraph in the commit information?

There is no hard rule about it, but I would appreciate it. In the end,
it’s the maintainers’ decision. You can amend the commit, and then 
regenerate the patch with `git format-patch -1 -v2`. Below the --- line 
you can add a short change-log, what you changed between the patch 
iterations.

>> I do not see the variable *flags* being used.
> 
> This patch has a typo, please ignore this one, I have submitted a new one
> that fixed this.

I have not seen this yet.

> I have tested the patch on a Ubuntu server 22.04 machine with kernel 
> version 5.19.17, then I generated the patch in the 'net-queue'
> development repo. I just handwritten the changes in the dev repo,
> made a silly mistake.
> 
> Apolot8ze for that, I'll be more careful next time.
No problem. This has happened to all of us. Congratulations on your 
first(?) Linux kernel contribution. Glad to have you and I am looking 
forward to your next improvements.


Kind regards,

Paul