netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v5 08/16] net: ethtool: Add a command to expose current time stamping layer

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]

Message-ID: <6ef6418d-6e63-49bd-bcc1-cdc6eb0da2d5@lunn.ch>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2023 18:11:19 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Köry Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
	"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>,
	Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
	Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...on.dev>,
	Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>,
	UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
	Broadcom internal kernel review list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
	Radu Pirea <radu-nicolae.pirea@....nxp.com>,
	Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
	Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
	Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>,
	Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
	Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 08/16] net: ethtool: Add a command to expose
 current time stamping layer

> > All these possibles timestamps go through exclusively the netdev API or the
> > phylib API. Even the software timestamping is done in the netdev driver,
> > therefore it goes through the netdev API and then should have the
> > NETDEV_TIMESTAMPING bit set.
> 
> Netdev vs phylib is an implementation detail of Linux.
> I'm also surprised that you changed this.
> 
> > > > + */
> > > > +enum {
> > > > +	NO_TIMESTAMPING = 0,
> > > > +	NETDEV_TIMESTAMPING = (1 << 0),
> > > > +	PHYLIB_TIMESTAMPING = (1 << 1),
> > > > +	SOFTWARE_TIMESTAMPING = (1 << 2) | (1 << 0),    

Just emphasising Jakubs point here. phylib is an implementation
detail, in that the MAC driver might be using firmware to drive its
PHY, and that firmware can do a timestamp in the PHY. The API being
defined here should be independent of the implementation details. So
it probably should be MAC_TIMESTAMPING and PHY_TIMESTAMPING, and leave
it to the driver to decide if its PHYLIB doing the actual work, or
firmware.

	Andrew