netdev - RE: [PATCH net 1/5] igb: reject invalid external timestamp requests for 82580-based HW

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: <PH0PR11MB5095402B94E269F50A7A8442D6D02@PH0PR11MB5095.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 05:03:05 +0000
From: "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "Nguyen, Anthony L" <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, "Kitszel, Przemyslaw"
	<przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David
 S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, "Jakub
 Kicinski" <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Richard Cochran
	<richardcochran@...il.com>, Ruud Bos <kernel.hbk@...il.com>, Paul Barker
	<paul.barker.ct@...renesas.com>, Niklas Söderlund
	<niklas.soderlund@...natech.se>, Bryan Whitehead
	<bryan.whitehead@...rochip.com>, "UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com"
	<UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, Raju Lakkaraju
	<Raju.Lakkaraju@...rochip.com>, Florian Fainelli
	<florian.fainelli@...adcom.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>,
	Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>, "Lasse Johnsen" <l@...johnsen.me>,
	Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>,
	"intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net 1/5] igb: reject invalid external timestamp requests
 for 82580-based HW



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 11:04 PM
> To: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
> Cc: Nguyen, Anthony L <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>; Kitszel, Przemyslaw
> <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>; Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>; David
> S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>; Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>;
> Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>; Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>; Richard
> Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>; Ruud Bos <kernel.hbk@...il.com>; Paul
> Barker <paul.barker.ct@...renesas.com>; Niklas Söderlund
> <niklas.soderlund@...natech.se>; Bryan Whitehead
> <bryan.whitehead@...rochip.com>; UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com; Raju
> Lakkaraju <Raju.Lakkaraju@...rochip.com>; Florian Fainelli
> <florian.fainelli@...adcom.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>;
> Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>; Lasse Johnsen
> <l@...johnsen.me>; Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>; intel-
> wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org; netdev@...r.kernel.org; linux-renesas-
> soc@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/5] igb: reject invalid external timestamp requests for
> 82580-based HW
> 
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 03:16:36PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
> > The igb_ptp_feature_enable_82580 function correctly checks that unknown
> > flags are not passed to the function. However, it does not actually check
> > PTP_RISING_EDGE or PTP_FALLING_EDGE when configuring the external
> timestamp
> > function.
> >
> > The data sheet for the 82580 product says:
> >
> >   Upon a change in the input level of one of the SDP pins that was
> >   configured to detect Time stamp events using the TSSDP register, a time
> >   stamp of the system time is captured into one of the two auxiliary time
> >   stamp registers (AUXSTMPL/H0 or AUXSTMPL/H1).
> >
> >   For example to define timestamping of events in the AUXSTMPL0 and
> >   AUXSTMPH0 registers, Software should:
> >
> >   1. Set the TSSDP.AUX0_SDP_SEL field to select the SDP pin that detects
> >      the level change and set the TSSDP.AUX0_TS_SDP_EN bit to 1.
> >
> >   2. Set the TSAUXC.EN_TS0 bit to 1 to enable timestamping
> >
> > The same paragraph is in the i350 and i354 data sheets.
> >
> > The wording implies that the time stamps are captured at any level change.
> > There does not appear to be any way to only timestamp one edge of the
> > signal.
> >
> > Reject requests which do not set both PTP_RISING_EDGE and
> PTP_FALLING_EDGE
> > when operating under PTP_STRICT_FLAGS mode via PTP_EXTTS_REQUEST2.
> >
> > Fixes: 38970eac41db ("igb: support EXTTS on 82580/i354/i350")
> > Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ptp.c | 5 +++++
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ptp.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ptp.c
> > index
> f9457055612004c10f74379122063e8136fe7d76..b89ef4538a18d7ca11325ddc1594
> 4a878f4d807e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ptp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ptp.c
> > @@ -509,6 +509,11 @@ static int igb_ptp_feature_enable_82580(struct
> ptp_clock_info *ptp,
> >  					PTP_STRICT_FLAGS))
> >  			return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >
> > +		/* Both the rising and falling edge are timstamped */
> > +		if (rq->extts.flags & PTP_STRICT_FLAGS &&
> > +		    (rq->extts.flags & PTP_EXTTS_EDGES) != PTP_EXTTS_EDGES)
> > +			return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +
> >  		if (on) {
> >  			pin = ptp_find_pin(igb->ptp_clock, PTP_PF_EXTTS,
> >  					   rq->extts.index);
> 
> Thanks for fixing
> Reviewed-by: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> In igb_ptp_feature_enable_i210() there is the same check for both edges
> but also PTP_ENABLE_FEATURE is tested. There is no need for it here, or
> it is redundant even in i210?
> 

Hmm. It might be required, because requests to disable the clock won't have PTP_FEATURE_ENABLED set, and might have the edges cleared, which would prevent you from disabling the output..? I'll have to see what the kernel does when it disables the function.