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: <20231013131505.2b27e3b8@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2023 13:15:05 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
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, 13 Oct 2023 20:56:01 +0300 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > I'm not really sure what you're referring to, with SOF_..._DMA.
> > > The DMA, if presented as a PHC as I am proposing, would play the role of
> > > the hardware timestamp provider (think SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_HARDWARE |
> > > SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_HARDWARE), so there will be no driver-visible
> > > special socket option flags for DMA timestamping.  
> > 
> > Each packet may want different timestamp tho, especially on Tx it
> > should be fairly easy for socket to request to get "real" MAC stamps,
> > while most get cheaper DMA stamps. Currently some drivers run flow
> > matching to find PTP packets and automatically give them better quality
> > timestamps :(
> > 
> > Even if at the config level we use PHCs we need to translate that into
> > some SKBTX_* bit, don't we?  
> 
> I think Richard had something to say about that being wishful thinking:
> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/ZGw46hrpiqCVNeXS@hoboy.vegasvil.org/

🤷️

> On RX I'm not sure how you'd know in advance if the packet is going to
> be routed to a socket that wants DMA or MAC timestamps. And having a
> socket with hardware timestamps from one provider in one direction, and
> another provider in the other direction, is.... not sane as a kernel API?

For DC NICs all the timestamps are based on the same PHC. The use case
is to get MAC/precise stamps for PTP and DMA/rough stamps for TCP CC.

Agreed that stamps from different PHCs in different directions would 
be weird.

Thinking about it again we want the ability to configure the rx filter
per stamping point. MAC stamps PTP frames and DMA stamps all the rest.
For Tx we need to know whether app wanted DMA or MAC stamp (more
or less whether it's PTP again, without running a classifier on the
packet).