netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] dpll: add clock quality level attribute and op

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZyD0ICz79VRiDIv6@nanopsycho.orion>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 15:41:36 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
	pabeni@...hat.com, donald.hunter@...il.com,
	vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev, arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com,
	saeedm@...dia.com, leon@...nel.org, tariqt@...dia.com,
	maciejm@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] dpll: add clock quality level attribute
 and op

Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 02:51:29PM CET, kuba@...nel.org wrote:
>On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 13:52:12 +0100 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> >I thought clock-id is basically clockid_t, IOW a reference.
>> >I wish that the information about timekeepers was exposed 
>> >by the time subsystem rather than DPLL. Something like clock_getres().  
>> 
>> Hmm. From what I understand, the quality of the clock as it is defined
>> by the ITU standard is an attribute of the DPLL device. DPLL device
>> in our model is basically a board, which might combine oscillator,
>> synchronizer and possibly other devices. The clock quality is determined
>> by this combination and I understand that the ITU certification is also
>> applied to this device.
>> 
>> That's why it makes sense to have the clock quality as the DPLL
>> attribute. Makes sense?
>
>Hm, reading more carefully sounds like it's the quality of the holdover
>clock. Can we say that in the documentation? "This mainly applies when

Yes.


>the dpll lock-status is not DPLL_LOCK_STATUS_LOCKED" is a bit of a mouthful.
>I think I missed the "not" first time reading it.

Okay, will try to re-phrase to avoid confusion.


>
>Is it marked as multi-attr in case non-ITU clock quality is defined
>later? Or is it legit to set to ITU bits at once?

For non-ITU as well as for possibly advertizing quality of different ITU
options (option 1 and option 2).