From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Soumyadeep Hore <soumyadeep.hore@intel.com>
Cc: <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>, <dev@dpdk.org>,
<shaiq.wani@intel.com>, <stable@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] net/ice: fix incorrect reading of PHY timestamp
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2024 12:16:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zyi7C1fkGwB9bO1A@bricha3-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241104103112.885071-1-soumyadeep.hore@intel.com>
On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 10:31:12AM +0000, Soumyadeep Hore wrote:
> In ICE PMD, previously the ready bitmap checking before reading
> PHY timestamp was not present. This caused incorrect Tx
> timestamping.
>
> The ready bitmap checking is enabled and PHY timestamp is read once
> the ready bitmap gives positive value.
>
> Fixes: 881169950d80 ("net/ice/base: implement initial PTP support for E830")
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Soumyadeep Hore <soumyadeep.hore@intel.com>
> ---
> v3:
> - Decreased the end time delay from 1 second to 10 microseconds
> ---
> v2:
> - Addressed Bruce's comments
> ---
> drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c
> index 70298ac330..3c768b6d0b 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c
> @@ -6597,10 +6597,27 @@ ice_timesync_read_tx_timestamp(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> struct ice_hw *hw = ICE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_HW(dev->data->dev_private);
> struct ice_adapter *ad =
> ICE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_ADAPTER(dev->data->dev_private);
> - uint64_t ts_ns, tstamp;
> + uint64_t ts_ns, tstamp, tstamp_ready = 0;
> + uint64_t end_time;
> const uint64_t mask = 0xFFFFFFFF;
> int ret;
>
> + /* Set the end time with a delay of 10 microseconds */
> + end_time = rte_get_timer_cycles() + (rte_get_timer_hz() / 100000);
> +
> + while (!(tstamp_ready & BIT_ULL(0))) {
Nit: in DPDK, we recommend using "== 0" explicitly for numeric comparisons.
The "!" should only be used for boolean values, not ints.
> + ret = ice_get_phy_tx_tstamp_ready(hw, ad->ptp_tx_block, &tstamp_ready);
> + if (ret) {
> + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "Failed to get phy ready for timestamp");
> + return -1;
> + }
> +
> + if (rte_get_timer_cycles() > end_time) {
> + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "Timeout to get phy ready for timestamp");
> + return -1;
> + }
Sorry for the last minute feedback here, but shouldn't these two conditions
be the other way around? Right now, if you call ice_get_phy_tx_tstamp_ready
just as the timer expires, and if the timestamp is actually ready this
time, you will exit with error instead of handling the timestamp.
Also, a very minor issue, but since you always want to go through the loop
at least once, a do { } while(0) might be a better construct. It would
avoid you having to initialize tstamp_ready to zero (not that it matters).
do {
if (rte_get_timer_cycles() > end_time) {
/* log error and return */
}
if (ice_get_phy_tx_tstamp_ready(...) != 0) {
/* error log and return */
}
} while((tstamp_ready & BIT_ULL(0)) == 0);
> + }
> +
> ret = ice_read_phy_tstamp(hw, ad->ptp_tx_block, ad->ptp_tx_index, &tstamp);
> if (ret || tstamp == 0) {
> PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "Failed to read phy timestamp");
> --
Regards,
/Bruce
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-04 12:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-25 10:26 [PATCH v1] " Soumyadeep Hore
2024-10-29 10:37 ` Singh, Aman Deep
2024-10-29 17:09 ` Bruce Richardson
2024-10-30 2:16 ` [PATCH v2] " Soumyadeep Hore
2024-10-30 15:31 ` Bruce Richardson
2024-11-04 10:31 ` [PATCH v3] " Soumyadeep Hore
2024-11-04 12:16 ` Bruce Richardson [this message]
2024-11-05 10:14 ` [PATCH v4] " Soumyadeep Hore
2024-11-05 11:33 ` Bruce Richardson
2024-11-06 8:22 ` [PATCH v5] " Soumyadeep Hore
2024-11-06 10:59 ` Bruce Richardson
2024-11-06 11:36 ` Bruce Richardson
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-10-25 5:14 [PATCH v2] " Soumyadeep Hore
2024-10-25 7:32 ` [PATCH v3] " Soumyadeep Hore
2024-10-25 8:55 ` Bruce Richardson
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=Zyi7C1fkGwB9bO1A@bricha3-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=aman.deep.singh@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=shaiq.wani@intel.com \
--cc=soumyadeep.hore@intel.com \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
/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).