netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] mlx4: update mlx4_clock

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>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAF2d9jjpcpyNQr3nUZG_Dj7hj=hMqeNK_D+f2XtneOiFVpeufg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 00:03:07 -0700
From: Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) <maheshb@...gle.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, 
	Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...dia.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, 
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>, Mahesh Bandewar <mahesh@...dewar.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] mlx4: update mlx4_clock_read() to provide
 pre/post tstamps

On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 1:44 AM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/10/24 10:36, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> > On 10/8/24 12:46, Mahesh Bandewar wrote:
> >> The mlx4_clock_read() function, when called by cycle_counter->read(),
> >> previously only returned the raw cycle count. However, for PTP helpers
> >> like gettimex64(), which require pre- and post-timestamps, simply
> >> returning raw cycles is insufficient. It also needs to provide the
> >> necessary timestamps.
> >>
> >> This update modifies mlx4_clock_read() to return both the cycles and
> >> the required timestamps. Additionally, mlx4_en_read_clock() is now
> >> responsible for reading and updating the clock_cache. This allows
> >> another function, mlx4_en_read_clock_cache(), to act as the cycle
> >> reader for cycle_counter->read(), preserving the same interface.
> >
> > It looks like this patch should be split in two, the first one could be
> > possibly 'net' material and just fix gettimex64()/mlx4_read_clock() and
> > the other one introduces the cache.
>
> My bad, I was too hasty and actually missed that the gettimex64()
> callback is implemented in the next patch.
>
> The main point still remains: the cache infra should be in a separate
> patch: it can introduce side effects and we want to be able to bisect.
>
Hi Paolo,

Thanks for the comment. I'll send the v2 with the separation where one
patch introduces just the time-cache
and the other piece adds the pre-/post-timestamps.

thanks,
> Thanks,
>
> Paolo
>