From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09DA88D96 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 12:36:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Nov 2015 03:36:20 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,270,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="832792513" Received: from irsmsx154.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.192.96]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Nov 2015 03:36:21 -0800 Received: from irsmsx155.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.192.3) by IRSMSX154.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.192.96) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 11:36:19 +0000 Received: from irsmsx103.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.3.13]) by irsmsx155.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.14.150]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 11:36:18 +0000 From: "Mcnamara, John" To: Thomas Monjalon , "Mrzyglod, DanielX T" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/7] ethdev: add additional ieee1588 support functions Thread-Index: AQHRG6fRGOUahZZcLU6rSCqvXP11WZ6VGyvw Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 11:36:18 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1443799208-9408-1-git-send-email-danielx.t.mrzyglod@intel.com> <1446732366-10044-1-git-send-email-danielx.t.mrzyglod@intel.com> <1446732366-10044-2-git-send-email-danielx.t.mrzyglod@intel.com> <2257223.vnG0RKMETz@xps13> In-Reply-To: <2257223.vnG0RKMETz@xps13> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.182] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/7] ethdev: add additional ieee1588 support functions X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 11:36:22 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon > Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 11:04 AM > To: Mrzyglod, DanielX T > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/7] ethdev: add additional ieee1588 > support functions >=20 > Hi, >=20 > Sorry for not having followed closer this series. > It was submitted at the last minute and got too few comments. Hi, The V2 version was submitted on the last day of the merge window but the AP= I was available in the V1. Comments could have been made then. > I'll try to fix it now to be sure it will be one of the first series read= y > for the 2.3 cycle. These comments are minor and could be fixed now. >=20 > 2015-11-05 15:06, Daniel Mrzyglod: > > --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_2_2.rst > > +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_2_2.rst > > @@ -222,6 +222,9 @@ API Changes > > > > * The devargs union field virtual is renamed to virt for C++ > compatibility. > > > > +* Add new functions in ethdev to support IEEE1588: > > +rte_eth_timesync_time_adjust() > > + rte_eth_timesync_time_get(), rte_eth_timesync_time_set() >=20 > No need to add an entry in API changes for new functions. OK. We can remove it now or I can remove it in the final release note edit. >=20 > > +/** > > + * Read the time from the timesync clock on an Ethernet device. > > + * > > + * @param port_id > > + * The port identifier of the Ethernet device. > > + * @param time > > + * Pointer to the timespec struct. > > + * > > + * @return > > + * - 0: Success. > > + */ > > +extern int rte_eth_timesync_time_get(uint8_t port_id, > > + struct timespec *time); >=20 > How is it different from rte_eth_timesync_read_rx_timestamp() and > rte_eth_timesync_read_tx_timestamp()? >=20 > Why repeating the word time? Why not rte_eth_timesync_get()? In the context of PTP there is a difference between the time (os or NIC) an= d the timestamp (either in the mbuf, a register or as part of the payload).= =20 > Not related to this patch, but in rte_eth_timesync_read_rx_timestamp(), > the flags parameter breaks the API layer separation with drivers: > * @param flags > * Device specific flags. Used to pass the RX timesync register index t= o > * i40e. Unused in igb/ixgbe, pass 0 instead. Yes. Unfortunately i40e has 4 RX registers and this information needs to be= passed down to the function is some way. I'd imagine that some other nics = might need similar config. I asked for feedback on this in the 2.1 cycle fr= om other nic maintainers but didn't get any. The kernel uses a struct hwtst= amp_config that I was initially going to use but didn't. John