From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1E39458C3; Mon, 9 Sep 2024 02:13:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73448402A8; Mon, 9 Sep 2024 02:13:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pl1-f169.google.com (mail-pl1-f169.google.com [209.85.214.169]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC9BB40294 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 9 Sep 2024 02:13:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pl1-f169.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-205659dc63aso36208615ad.1 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Sun, 08 Sep 2024 17:13:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1725840837; x=1726445637; darn=dpdk.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=NlJozQtVyh1ZFggmcPIuPa4NlSTeJ9N+5uwo68Xio70=; b=EGouuI28gJNr8iiO+O+h4DI6NsulH3gBaYkypqEd9SGmJ75TtZUYkU7E0tDZilAmrY 897kf6f6OR56/NN1M3SYLg/DP9PLhj+8qG248QSpaZ7qIkTN6ht2AswGMqw04CJESPsi iu6CGFQU4W1PqpTk8O6uGobNqHMWiU9TvzwIG+ilEF8X8SDJuXPO4L0Mrxwz1mG4sLGf 0TPq0bnlmM7NWL+taH1q07oAuW9hFGfcAA+trZ4W3DB3MurED9HSFOxyu8AoEV0nEDqB 3PXXkEuhVYTaVk56a05aLBP+Kxdp+ST9LhVSa90jzkFnnxIvTzsbpPtzn1xEnChKsHCM 0W/Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1725840837; x=1726445637; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=NlJozQtVyh1ZFggmcPIuPa4NlSTeJ9N+5uwo68Xio70=; b=Y894+mxeImT9QWb6Mp1JUzqEqICEu0yejWdOmNXvXjJr2iWHm87rEDl0UhSR+U2A3T G6+vSrv/Tv8c7AwBSVa9MM07i08sgtobYwTQNioEDCrkWBq9BgxLHghDUF4ECqKVPoEP JGosuogRlfXhPTC0IjTmn5gUhLT36Nrh95OkOO+vf6ZBdG+vn9hwq6qkCAGQMyLd82vL C34AxVOOPdScCT7q66Cu3VR1Uo++S46s0W+Tb9lhpihkndt4HnUR1Dp/r2tVu0fh90fc U+g6BjxjviDBmpqXgCuSJscgrBPK7dezRF1QJ6MPYB6RwVpIaWHTF6L/ufsZl+6zRSo7 i+Bw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyh/OZHNokZkBekhpd3sHPI0Zj5pRnQsu+u1mDm0PeJeNBmeBNP GSXbmDC8q6V+4uyULE784uvMR8LpBhO0QYIM/0BTXcO9RzKYQRcHs/cidGbVmGo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFp1GY6iGjOl/MH81R8VmGO6mtwtv1EaKBMzH6YsMCKP7/dD5DBPQ8p2N43tqTNr6d9bulD2Q== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:e80c:b0:205:8a1a:53eb with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-206f04f6689mr83415075ad.18.1725840836726; Sun, 08 Sep 2024 17:13:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.local (204-195-96-226.wavecable.com. [204.195.96.226]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9443c01a7336-20710f3552bsm24010865ad.289.2024.09.08.17.13.56 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 08 Sep 2024 17:13:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2024 17:13:55 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> To: Dpdk Newbie <dpdkuser77@gmail.com> Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: Does DPDK provide RX timestamps? Message-ID: <20240908171355.264071b2@hermes.local> In-Reply-To: <CAJgPhro2CF2gzouZmz0seKDzNej540GzuA_UyCGpG_zZT2gCwA@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAJgPhro2CF2gzouZmz0seKDzNej540GzuA_UyCGpG_zZT2gCwA@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 23:31:36 +0100 Dpdk Newbie <dpdkuser77@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi. I am using Intel (i210) and AWS ENA network interface cards. > > I would like to measure the following RX latencies: > > 1) NIC to DPDK packet ring buffer > 2) DPDK packet ring buffer to application via rte_eth_rx_burst. > > I don't mind measuring in nanoseconds or CPU cycles. > > Unfortunately I cannot find any mention of hardware timestamps. > > I found brief references to mbuf containing a timestamp in the dynamic > fields, but nothing definitive. > > Could someone please clarify what the situation is? > > Thanks, Depends on the hardware, and the dynamic field for rx timestamp also varies in its clock value. Some are ticks, some are us, some are ns; and the base is arbitrary so difficult to use for packet capture.