From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp-3.sys.kth.se (smtp-3.sys.kth.se [130.237.48.192]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 465DB3256 for ; Sat, 8 Dec 2018 13:07:45 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-3.sys.kth.se (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-3.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB7DE2DBA; Sat, 8 Dec 2018 13:07:44 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at kth.se Received: from smtp-3.sys.kth.se ([127.0.0.1]) by smtp-3.sys.kth.se (smtp-3.sys.kth.se [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id M-phXUY8BQFq; Sat, 8 Dec 2018 13:07:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from exdb02.ug.kth.se (unknown [192.168.32.112]) by smtp-3.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 455D4F59; Sat, 8 Dec 2018 13:07:42 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kth.se; s=default; t=1544270864; bh=pOurtGEewUJ8A25JiD/cB6edvJBNooewMuBDNGYgW9A=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To; b=HLmAiizn9JQpnOVnzMZSvjNgxLlbvUwXi4jkxl2n2pI3xvmx3yejvz7Si60lneizW aAWc6PwLL4oc/5ofs0dNDufHtkb0aX1x2LYXGdT6VXiDIDK3RaLetiaoXo+EWtFCeO /oLep3b1X6i1r/e3YGdVJITP4diVFqpTifWMZVbc= Received: from exdb06.ug.kth.se (192.168.32.116) by exdb02.ug.kth.se (192.168.32.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1367.3; Sat, 8 Dec 2018 13:07:42 +0100 Received: from exdb05.ug.kth.se (192.168.32.115) by exdb06.ug.kth.se (192.168.32.116) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1367.3; Sat, 8 Dec 2018 13:07:42 +0100 Received: from exdb05.ug.kth.se ([192.168.32.115]) by exdb05.ug.kth.se ([192.168.32.115]) with mapi id 15.00.1367.000; Sat, 8 Dec 2018 13:07:42 +0100 From: Tom Barbette To: "zr@semihalf.com" , "dev@dpdk.org" CC: Shahaf Shuler Thread-Topic: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Add rte_eth_read_clock API Thread-Index: AQHUjLhHQbJDAnNeS06Y7oVxQ10UV6V0wY8+ Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2018 12:07:42 +0000 Message-ID: <1544270863117.53481@kth.se> References: <1543398732-79439-2-git-send-email-barbette@kth.se>, <1544027600-9390-1-git-send-email-zr@semihalf.com> In-Reply-To: <1544027600-9390-1-git-send-email-zr@semihalf.com> Accept-Language: fr-FR, sv-SE, en-US Content-Language: fr-FR X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [83.249.19.162] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/3] Add rte_eth_read_clock API X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2018 12:07:45 -0000 Hi Zyta,=0A= =0A= This was my initial proposal, but after discussion with Shahaf Shuler we th= ought this was too far from the original intent of the function.=0A= rte_eth_timesync_read_time is clearly identified as part of a set of functi= on to use PTP synchronization. =0A= This clock is not "sync" in any way. More importantly, the returned value i= s not a timeval. So it's true this patch actually does a cast from timeval = in ib_verbs, but it's already a "bad usage" in some sense because the value= sitting in tv_nsec is not an amount of nsec but only an amount of ticks. I= would be afraid some people seeing the timeval type of rte_eth_timesync_re= ad_time would use it blindly.=0A= =0A= But as far as I'm concerned, I can go with one or the other in our use case= s...=0A= =0A= Thanks,=0A= Tom=0A= =0A= =0A= ________________________________________=0A= De : zr@semihalf.com =0A= Envoy=E9 : mercredi 5 d=E9cembre 2018 17:33=0A= =C0 : Tom Barbette; dev@dpdk.org=0A= Cc : Zyta Szpak=0A= Objet : Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Add rte_eth_read_clock API=0A= =0A= From: Zyta Szpak =0A= =0A= I'd ask few questions: how is this new rte_ethdev_read_clock different from= existing rte_eth_timesync_read_time ?=0A= Is it that this new function does not convert the clock raw value into time= spec? Would it be too much overhead to use the timespec type of value? Or d= o they intent to read different clocks?=0A=