From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>
To: "lihuisong (C)" <lihuisong@huawei.com>,
dev@dpdk.org, Gagandeep Singh <g.singh@nxp.com>,
Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
Cc: thomas@monjalon.net, andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru,
liuyonglong@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] ethdev: add the check for PTP capability
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2023 12:06:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0d7f429c-8862-4f16-b7e5-46d69581f54f@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <242e8583-969e-d8ca-2dd4-80e8cf73a662@huawei.com>
On 9/21/2023 11:02 AM, lihuisong (C) wrote:
> Hi Ferruh,
>
> Sorry for my delay reply because of taking a look at all PMDs
> implementation.
>
>
> 在 2023/9/16 1:46, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
>> On 8/17/2023 9:42 AM, Huisong Li wrote:
>>> From the first version of ptpclient, it seems that this example
>>> assume that
>>> the PMDs support the PTP feature and enable PTP by default. Please see
>>> commit ab129e9065a5 ("examples/ptpclient: add minimal PTP client")
>>> which are introduced in 2015.
>>>
>>> And two years later, Rx HW timestamp offload was introduced to enable or
>>> disable PTP feature in HW via rte_eth_rxmode. Please see
>>> commit 42ffc45aa340 ("ethdev: add Rx HW timestamp capability").
>>>
>> Hi Huisong,
>>
>> As far as I know this offload is not for PTP.
>> PTP and TIMESTAMP are different.
> If TIMESTAMP offload cannot stand for PTP, we may need to add one new
> offlaod for PTP.
>
Can you please detail what is "PTP offload"?
>>
>> PTP is a protocol for time sync.
>> Rx TIMESTAMP offload is to ask HW to add timestamp to mbuf.
> Yes.
> But a lot of PMDs actually depand on HW to report Rx timestamp releated
> information
> because of reading Rx timestamp of PTP SYNC packet in read_rx_timestamp
> API.
>
HW support may be required for PTP but this doesn't mean timestamp
offload is used.
>>
>>> And then about four years later, ptpclient enable Rx timestamp offload
>>> because some PMDs require this offload to enable. Please see
>>> commit 7a04a4f67dca ("examples/ptpclient: enable Rx timestamp offload").
>>>
>> dpaa2 seems using TIMESTAMP offload and PTP together, hence they updated
>> ptpclient sample to set TIMESTAMP offload.
> There are many PMDs doing like this, such as ice, igc, cnxk, dpaa2, hns3
> and so on.
>
Can you please point the ice & igc code, cc'ing their maintainers, we
can look together?
>>
>> We need to clarify dpaa2 usage.
>>
>>> By all the records, this is more like a process of perfecting PTP
>>> feature.
>>> Not all network adaptors support PTP feature. So adding the check for
>>> PTP
>>> capability in ethdev layer is necessary.
>>>
>> Nope, as PTP (IEEE1588/802.1AS) implemented as dev_ops, and ops already
>> checked, so no additional check is needed.
> But only having dev_ops about PTP doesn't satisfy the use of this feature.
> For example,
> there are serveal network ports belonged to a driver on one OS, and only
> one port support PTP function.
> So driver needs one *PTP* offload.
>>
>> We just need to clarify TIMESTAMP offload and PTP usage and find out
>> what is causing confusion.
> Yes it is a little bit confusion.
> There are two kinds of implementation:
> A： ixgbe and txgbe (it seems that their HW is similar) don't need
> TIMESTAMP offload，and only use dev_ops to finish PTP feature.
> B: saving "Rx timestamp related information" from Rx description when
> receive PTP SYNC packet and
> report it in read_rx_timestamp API.
> For case B, most of driver use TIMESTAMP offload to decide if driver
> save "Rx timestamp related information.
> What do you think about this, Ferruh?
>> I would be great if you can help on clarification, and update
>> documentation or API comments, or what ever required, for this.
> ok
>>
>>> ---
>>> v3:
>>> - patch [2/3] for hns3 has been applied and so remove it.
>>> - ops pointer check is closer to usage.
>>>
>>> Huisong Li (2):
>>> examples/ptpclient: add the check for PTP capability
>>> ethdev: add the check for the valitity of timestamp offload
>>>
>>> examples/ptpclient/ptpclient.c | 5 +++
>>> lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>> .
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-21 11:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-28 13:39 [PATCH 0/3] some bugfixes for PTP Dongdong Liu
2022-06-28 13:39 ` [PATCH 1/3] examples/ptpclient: add the check for PTP capability Dongdong Liu
2022-06-28 13:39 ` [PATCH 2/3] net/hns3: fix fail to receive PTP packet Dongdong Liu
2022-06-28 13:39 ` [PATCH 3/3] ethdev: add the check for the valitity of timestamp offload Dongdong Liu
2022-07-02 8:17 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] some bugfixes for PTP Dongdong Liu
2022-07-02 8:17 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] examples/ptpclient: add the check for PTP capability Dongdong Liu
2022-07-02 8:17 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] net/hns3: fix fail to receive PTP packet Dongdong Liu
2022-07-02 8:17 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] ethdev: add the check for the valitity of timestamp offload Dongdong Liu
2022-07-06 14:57 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2022-07-07 2:05 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-08-17 8:42 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] ethdev: add the check for PTP capability Huisong Li
2023-08-17 8:42 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] examples/ptpclient: " Huisong Li
2023-09-15 17:29 ` Ferruh Yigit
2023-09-21 9:18 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-09-21 11:02 ` Ferruh Yigit
2023-09-21 11:22 ` Hemant Agrawal
2023-10-20 4:05 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-09-21 11:36 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-08-17 8:42 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] ethdev: add the check for the valitity of timestamp offload Huisong Li
2023-09-15 17:46 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] ethdev: add the check for PTP capability Ferruh Yigit
2023-09-21 10:02 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-09-21 11:06 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2023-09-21 11:17 ` Hemant Agrawal
2023-10-20 3:58 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-11-01 23:39 ` Ferruh Yigit
2023-11-23 11:40 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-11-01 23:39 ` Ferruh Yigit
2023-09-21 11:59 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-11-01 23:39 ` Ferruh Yigit
2023-11-23 11:56 ` lihuisong (C)
2024-01-11 6:25 ` lihuisong (C)
2024-01-26 16:54 ` Ferruh Yigit
2024-01-27 1:52 ` lihuisong (C)
2024-01-29 11:16 ` Ferruh Yigit
2024-01-29 13:58 ` lihuisong (C)
2024-01-29 15:00 ` 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=0d7f429c-8862-4f16-b7e5-46d69581f54f@amd.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@amd.com \
--cc=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=g.singh@nxp.com \
--cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
--cc=lihuisong@huawei.com \
--cc=liuyonglong@huawei.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/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).