From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from delivery.mailspamprotection.com (delivery.mailspamprotection.com [96.127.176.252]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8673E1E34 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2019 09:01:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from ns1.es18.siteground.eu ([37.60.250.193] helo=es18.siteground.eu) by se3.mailspamprotection.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gzd6p-000AUM-OH for users@dpdk.org; Fri, 01 Mar 2019 02:01:33 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=filipjaniszewski.com; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=IF18W1dhcbHkjdVJiwJ/zONagHxTV0pMann89ST9eaY=; b=IBPWF7/1MwESvB80pK9oV6G+M8 Gu0M9JLkCRrg8nyDIbFI9JxwvJLUjenPehGCPFQk8yjERUefhO/DS1CK+HT77sekYR3b5DfJIMdBQ VuV9qx28/WOhUMmFo39y/Jhg/rgFBfq30N/cmtoFEVbTJ+tF4ow/PwPJxDRKaqOGnF6cPBahX4bxH L4JV62jcDwmuCtntxQnt/szZE/SF9AS/M0VTrciggnxZU6FmoeBVqL8Mb+rRQZR0w3NjSDmdM0mrG eI3rGHD/genavflJzh5Vr8vH3DTrBk2ClEj7kMdKKSA0vUkpFAqO3sUC5L0lQRRZoNlOWQWPmSqpg SbqlW4mQ==; Received: from [89.64.173.160] (port=58814 helo=localhost.localdomain) by es18.siteground.eu with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89_34-9f6032f-XX) (envelope-from ) id 1gzd6o-0001mz-Hd for users@dpdk.org; Fri, 01 Mar 2019 09:01:30 +0100 To: "users@dpdk.org" From: Filip Janiszewski Message-ID: <3255fe97-0193-5632-d39e-adc4d7882a40@filipjaniszewski.com> Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 09:01:29 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: 37.60.250.193 X-SpamExperts-Domain: es18.siteground.eu X-SpamExperts-Username: 37.60.250.193 Authentication-Results: mailspamprotection.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=37.60.250.193@es18.siteground.eu X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Class: ham X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.29) X-Recommended-Action: accept X-Filter-ID: EX5BVjFpneJeBchSMxfU5uqeAwBCzInwiAW4QzNo5Nx602E9L7XzfQH6nu9C/Fh9KJzpNe6xgvOx q3u0UDjvO1v+PcEVtX7KZY7H5dkGCkxVjyn5UrUp4n4yKOOaq9AxZ3b5F3E7OqPH21clNqmRslDj fzzJ6O8jiVhZi+WiYeCsScX6I9Dl5i6VrUM1b/j5UkKLmtZb26ZOBNZRVM8aKeM0SnoZX29Ppjgp pjrn+Yq1umcuh1GvkHLZ8OnZHyNWPMpNXxpZuiYRs23iVM0elyiH1+ntxr00hn81KleQJQ+Py4pL zcBjxmjH72ILbiTFKPGp/DIIBivDZ+qRALOR3IWfOYTdHK+DIp6SWjAcPxjNdMc0+tLrm/OM2ZNN 7xVKXvDuFGkOuRGwqhSPI4i0mE7ORMeWjWZXIFUBbQIaxIo93SsS4aMXJmiJ2G0eb5ahlbDFGdMZ ORWs51tC2DIbMynb08gY7Z9WGbWn9uGQ9nE7ewl4g2tpBYo5PepVWtf5e3KKC/am0SSdnvIEkFKi CUWk9qjCPHj1p0MEjRB6kxXL1dQzbDGk/AKdxeY/WW00IwWlx5GOTYwpXYPNM1TcHMgHRT9ECLff buvAPf38z5zScWiczx8i1pArtbeRR38Y+/YTAUzIKEDhdJQDEmx2LY8zlF0NuV2x3dbZ9Yap7kaK TkqNTmfIXTDQjES/cfAgBJt09RtfY0jfl26yqVDqrRMCmPOYNtu9U1P0PUiSA1CDPFytuHyCRAEK JNmMsV0OFS3j1CL0MCFwBsMTHyeaweTU5hCKmg0HvFcvqfVW7HGsHaGRbkv0i/cE9eg6RnHh5HDM G1jnOMNkkY91frKIelHy4A1GDh4BjJHk5pSlfEVGbGQH/hvcskRuIZpEVkpjt39eJyuiJKKaxjcR KAhUSc3nbw3qUx3nrgnxDIe1R1Eai8lITf0h/EL6RdOFfhWCOjIS2sRkljbb0V8yFyPFYPOvZuSq z72ZUJpUnrU91lNvSkhDfFRNluiqVRX3kqZrvzBmgWOpVgHABM8iVVdczDEPiNSX+/t4ouUI77Yp oPs8F/IJRA8ZF8C5AnJBxSFDr6AeYKj2k4CPZZebokP6BRSzT3e/vErSojFNgZ+z2eBr1XnruN+a 229WXkyXzpy1 X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine1.mailspamprotection.com Subject: [dpdk-users] Time-stamping from 18.05 to 19.02 X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2019 08:01:34 -0000 Hi, In order to understand how DPDK handle HW timestamps (which is very confusing between version) I've prepare a small DPDK test application which capture packets on a give port and print some information, like pkt_len, timestamp etc - very basic stuff. I've enabled the offload DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_TIMESTAMP at port/queue level, and built the application with DPDK 18.05. The captured packets are valid and although the hardware timestamp is crappy I still can see something, example output: "queue 1, len 139, timestamp (1) 55659417086261" from: . fprintf(stderr,"queue %d, len %"PRIu32", timestamp (%d) %"PRIu64, queue_idx, pkt_bufs[0]->pkt_len, ( int )( 0 != ( pkt_bufs[0]->ol_flags & PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP ) ), pkt_bufs[0]->timestamp); . (Where pkt_bufs is an array of mbufs, there is a check before the fprintf that verify something has been captured, so the code is "safe".. but ugly (hey, that's a test app after all..) The PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP flag is set, which make sense.. Then i switched to DPDK 19.02 and recompiled, the only change in the code that was required was to remove the line where i set hw_timestamp to 1 in rte_eth_rxmode, this field does not exist anymore. With this new DPDK the packets are not coming with any timestamp and PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP in ol_flags is not set, what has changed between those two DPDK relase (major vs stable) and what should I do to enable timestamping? Thanks -- BR, Filip +48 666 369 823