On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 9:08 AM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 11:22:32AM -0500, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Add optional PTP hardware timestamp offload for virtio-net.
> >
> > Accurate RTT measurement requires timestamps close to the wire.
> > Introduce virtio feature VIRTIO_NET_F_RX_TSTAMP. If negotiated, the
> > virtio-net header is expanded with room for a timestamp. A host may
> > pass receive timestamps for all or some packets. A timestamp is valid
> > if non-zero.
> >
> > The timestamp straddles (virtual) hardware domains. Like PTP, use
> > international atomic time (CLOCK_TAI) as global clock base. It is
> > guest responsibility to sync with host, e.g., through kvm-clock.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++++-
> > include/uapi/linux/virtio_net.h | 12 ++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > index b917b7333928..57744bb6a141 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > @@ -204,6 +204,9 @@ struct virtnet_info {
> > /* Guest will pass tx path info to the host */
> > bool has_tx_hash;
> >
> > + /* Host will pass CLOCK_TAI receive time to the guest */
> > + bool has_rx_tstamp;
> > +
> > /* Has control virtqueue */
> > bool has_cvq;
> >
> > @@ -292,6 +295,13 @@ static inline struct virtio_net_hdr_mrg_rxbuf *skb_vnet_hdr(struct sk_buff *skb)
> > return (struct virtio_net_hdr_mrg_rxbuf *)skb->cb;
> > }
> >
> > +static inline struct virtio_net_hdr_v12 *skb_vnet_hdr_12(struct sk_buff *skb)
> > +{
> > + BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(struct virtio_net_hdr_v12) > sizeof(skb->cb));
> > +
> > + return (void *)skb->cb;
> > +}
> > +
> > /*
> > * private is used to chain pages for big packets, put the whole
> > * most recent used list in the beginning for reuse
> > @@ -1082,6 +1092,9 @@ static void receive_buf(struct virtnet_info *vi, struct receive_queue *rq,
> > goto frame_err;
> > }
> >
> > + if (vi->has_rx_tstamp)
> > + skb_hwtstamps(skb)->hwtstamp = ns_to_ktime(skb_vnet_hdr_12(skb)->tstamp);
> > +
> > skb_record_rx_queue(skb, vq2rxq(rq->vq));
> > skb->protocol = eth_type_trans(skb, dev);
> > pr_debug("Receiving skb proto 0x%04x len %i type %i\n",
> > @@ -3071,6 +3084,11 @@ static int virtnet_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> > vi->hdr_len = sizeof(struct virtio_net_hdr_v1_hash);
> > }
> >
> > + if (virtio_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_NET_F_RX_TSTAMP)) {
> > + vi->has_rx_tstamp = true;
> > + vi->hdr_len = sizeof(struct virtio_net_hdr_v12);
> > + }
> > +
> > if (virtio_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_F_ANY_LAYOUT) ||
> > virtio_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1))
> > vi->any_header_sg = true;
> > @@ -3261,7 +3279,7 @@ static struct virtio_device_id id_table[] = {
> > VIRTIO_NET_F_CTRL_MAC_ADDR, \
> > VIRTIO_NET_F_MTU, VIRTIO_NET_F_CTRL_GUEST_OFFLOADS, \
> > VIRTIO_NET_F_SPEED_DUPLEX, VIRTIO_NET_F_STANDBY, \
> > - VIRTIO_NET_F_TX_HASH
> > + VIRTIO_NET_F_TX_HASH, VIRTIO_NET_F_RX_TSTAMP
> >
> > static unsigned int features[] = {
> > VIRTNET_FEATURES,
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/virtio_net.h b/include/uapi/linux/virtio_net.h
> > index f6881b5b77ee..0ffe2eeebd4a 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/virtio_net.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/virtio_net.h
> > @@ -57,6 +57,7 @@
> > * Steering */
> > #define VIRTIO_NET_F_CTRL_MAC_ADDR 23 /* Set MAC address */
> >
> > +#define VIRTIO_NET_F_RX_TSTAMP 55 /* Host sends TAI receive time */
> > #define VIRTIO_NET_F_TX_HASH 56 /* Guest sends hash report */
> > #define VIRTIO_NET_F_HASH_REPORT 57 /* Supports hash report */
> > #define VIRTIO_NET_F_RSS 60 /* Supports RSS RX steering */
> > @@ -182,6 +183,17 @@ struct virtio_net_hdr_v1_hash {
> > };
> > };
> >
> > +struct virtio_net_hdr_v12 {
> > + struct virtio_net_hdr_v1 hdr;
> > + struct {
> > + __le32 value;
> > + __le16 report;
> > + __le16 flow_state;
> > + } hash;
> > + __virtio32 reserved;
>
>
> Does endian-ness matter? If not - just u32?
I suppose it does not matter as long as this is reserved. Should it be
__le32, at least?
> > + __virtio64 tstamp;
> > +};
> > +
>
> Given it's only available in modern devices, I think we
> can make this __le64 tstamp.
Actually, would it be possible to make new features available on
legacy devices? There is nothing in the features bits precluding it.
I have a revised patchset almost ready. I suppose I should send it as
RFC again, and simultaneously file an OASIS ballot for each feature?
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
