DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "lihuisong (C)" <lihuisong@huawei.com>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.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 18:02:28 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <242e8583-969e-d8ca-2dd4-80e8cf73a662@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1834a6a9-ef92-4a67-a987-490151cf5380@amd.com>

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.
>
> 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.
>
>> 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.
>
> 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(-)
>>
> .

  reply	other threads:[~2023-09-21 10:02 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) [this message]
2023-09-21 11:06       ` Ferruh Yigit
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=242e8583-969e-d8ca-2dd4-80e8cf73a662@huawei.com \
    --to=lihuisong@huawei.com \
    --cc=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@amd.com \
    --cc=g.singh@nxp.com \
    --cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.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).