DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, PATRICK KEROULAS <patrick.keroulas@radio-canada.ca>,
	 Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/pcap: support hardware Tx timestamps
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 18:10:09 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJ2J69iN+V=GsPA-BkMQGprxagFRjs4AV7kCVFRMO-ij7b5-EA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5991f5d8-5d7f-4caf-733c-a5d29110a046@intel.com>

Hi Oliver,

Surprisingly, dumping PCAP with hardware timestamps seems to be a niche,
but we do need this feature for our network analyzing tool.

Do you guys have objections for this patch?

Regards,
Vivien


On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 4:16 AM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> wrote:

> On 6/10/2020 8:39 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> > When hardware timestamping is enabled on Rx path, system time should
> > no longer be used to calculate the timestamps when dumping packets.
> >
> > Instead, use the value stored by the driver in mbuf->timestamp
> > and assume it is already converted to nanoseconds (otherwise the
> > application may edit the packet headers itself afterwards).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Patrick Keroulas <patrick.keroulas@radio-canada.ca>
> > ---
> >  doc/guides/rel_notes/release_20_08.rst |  1 +
> >  drivers/net/pcap/rte_eth_pcap.c        | 30 +++++++++++++++-----------
> >  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_20_08.rst
> b/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_20_08.rst
> > index 7a67c960c..cedceaf9d 100644
> > --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_20_08.rst
> > +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_20_08.rst
> > @@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ New Features
> >    Updated PCAP driver with new features and improvements, including:
> >
> >    * Support software Tx nanosecond timestamps precision.
> > +  * Support hardware Tx timestamps.
> >
> >  * **Updated Mellanox mlx5 driver.**
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/pcap/rte_eth_pcap.c
> b/drivers/net/pcap/rte_eth_pcap.c
> > index 13a3d0ac7..3d80b699b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/pcap/rte_eth_pcap.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/pcap/rte_eth_pcap.c
> > @@ -290,19 +290,23 @@ eth_null_rx(void *queue __rte_unused,
> >  #define NSEC_PER_SEC 1000000000L
> >
> >  static inline void
> > -calculate_timestamp(struct timeval *ts) {
> > -     uint64_t cycles;
> > -     struct timeval cur_time;
> > +calculate_timestamp(const struct rte_mbuf *mbuf, struct timeval *ts) {
> > +     if (mbuf->ol_flags & PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP) {
> > +             ts->tv_sec = mbuf->timestamp / NSEC_PER_SEC;
> > +             ts->tv_usec = mbuf->timestamp % NSEC_PER_SEC;
>
> Hi Vivien,
>
> No objection from pcap PMD point of view.
>
> But should we have a Tx mbuf flag, 'PKT_TX_TIMESTAMP', for applications to
> request drivers to use the timestamp field on Tx path? Not sure if there
> can be
> any problem on using Rx flag on both direction?
>
> Also the metric is not defined for the 'mbuf->timestamp', it doesn't need
> to be
> nanoseconds, not sure if it is correct to assume it is. Or should we
> define a
> metric for timestamp on the Tx path?
>
> cc'ed Oliver, I think he can comment better on above two questions.
>
> Thanks,
> ferruh
>
>

  reply	other threads:[~2020-06-25 11:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-06-10 19:39 Vivien Didelot
2020-06-16 19:02 ` Vivien Didelot
2020-06-17  8:16 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-06-23 22:10   ` Vivien Didelot [this message]
2020-06-25 16:35     ` Olivier Matz
2020-06-25 18:49       ` Vivien Didelot
2020-06-26 13:52         ` Ferruh Yigit

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAJ2J69iN+V=GsPA-BkMQGprxagFRjs4AV7kCVFRMO-ij7b5-EA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=vivien.didelot@gmail.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
    --cc=patrick.keroulas@radio-canada.ca \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).