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: <20231013161446.st7tlemyaj3ggkgk@skbuf>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2023 19:14:46 +0300
From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
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>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	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>,
	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

On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 09:00:20AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:23:43 +0200 Köry Maincent wrote:
> > > Why do we have to set NETDEV_TIMESTAMPING here, or is this a round-about 
> > > way of enumerating 0, 1, 2 and 3?  
> > 
> > I answered you above the software timestamping should have the
> > NETDEV_TIMESTAMPING bit set as it is done from the net device driver.
> > 
> > What I was thinking is that all the new timestamping should have
> > NETDEV_TIMESTAMPING or PHYLIB_TIMESTAMPING set to know which API to pass
> > through.
> > Like we could add these in the future:
> > MAC_DMA_TIMESTAMPING = (2 << 2) | (1 >> 0),
> > MAC_PRECISION_TIMESTAMPING = (3 << 2) | (1 >> 0),
> > ...
> > PHY_SFP_TIMESTAMPING = (2 << 2) | (1 << 1),
> > ...
> 
> What is "PRECISION"? DMA is a separate block like MAC and PHY.

If DMA is a separate block like MAC and PHY, can it have its own PHC
device, and the ethtool UAPI only lists the timestamping-capable PHCs
for one NIC, and is able to select between them? Translation between the
UAPI-visible PHC index and MAC, DMA, phylib PHY, other PHY etc can then
be done by the kernel as needed.