Re: [PATCH 1/3] Add TX sending hardware timestamp.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> > If I understand correctly, you are trying to achieve a single delivery time.
>> > The need for two separate timestamps passed along is only because the
>> > kernel is unable to do the time base conversion.
>>
>> Yes, a correct point.
>>
>> >
>> > Else, ETF could program the qdisc watchdog in system time and later,
>> > on dequeue, convert skb->tstamp to the h/w time base before
>> > passing it to the device.
>>
>> Or the skb->tstamp is HW time-stamp and the ETF convert it to system clock based.
>>
>> >
>> > It's still not entirely clear to me why the packet has to be held by
>> > ETF initially first, if it is held until delivery time by hardware
>> > later. But more on that below.
>>
>> Let plot a simple scenario.
>> App A send a packet with time-stamp 100.
>> After arrive a second packet from App B with time-stamp 90.
>> Without ETF, the second packet will have to wait till the interface hardware send the first packet on 100.
>> Making the second packet late by 10 + first packet send time.
>> Obviously other "normal" packets are send to the non-ETF queue, though they do not block ETF packets
>> The ETF delta is a barrier that the application have to send the packet before to ensure the packet do not tossed.
>
> Got it. The assumption here is that devices are FIFO. That is not
> necessarily the case, but I do not know whether it is in practice,
> e.g., on the i210.

On the i210 and i225, that's indeed the case, i.e. only the launch time
of the packet at the front of the queue is considered.

[...]

>> >>>>> It only requires that pacing qdiscs, both sch_etf and sch_fq,
>> >>>>> optionally skip queuing in their .enqueue callback and instead allow
>> >>>>> the skb to pass to the device driver as is, with skb->tstamp set. Only
>> >>>>> to devices that advertise support for h/w pacing offload.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>> I did not use "Fair Queue traffic policing".
>> >>>> As for ETF, it is all about ordering packets from different applications.
>> >>>> How can we achive it with skiping queuing?
>> >>>> Could you elaborate on this point?
>> >>>
>> >>> The qdisc can only defer pacing to hardware if hardware can ensure the
>> >>> same invariants on ordering, of course.
>> >>
>> >> Yes, this is why we suggest ETF order packets using the hardware time-stamp.
>> >> And pass the packet based on system time.
>> >> So ETF query the system clock only and not the PHC.
>> >
>> > On which note: with this patch set all applications have to agree to
>> > use h/w time base in etf_enqueue_timesortedlist. In practice that
>> > makes this h/w mode a qdisc used by a single process?
>>
>> A single process theoretically does not need ETF, just set the skb-> tstamp and use a pass through queue.
>> However the only way now to set TC_SETUP_QDISC_ETF in the driver is using ETF.
>
> Yes, and I'd like to eventually get rid of this constraint.
>

I'm interested in these kind of ideas :-)

What would be your end goal? Something like:
 - Any application is able to set SO_TXTIME;
 - We would have a best effort support for scheduling packets based on
 their transmission time enabled by default;
 - If the hardware supports, there would be a "offload" flag that could
 be enabled;

More or less this?


Cheers.
-- 
Vinicius



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Newbies]     [x86 Platform Driver]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux