On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 09:05:58AM +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 03:24:42AM +0000, Song, Yoong Siang wrote: > > On Thursday, December 11, 2025 1:13 AM, Richardson, Bruce > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >On Sat, Nov 08, 2025 at 04:06:13PM +0800, Song Yoong Siang wrote: > > >> Change eth_igc_read_clock() to read from hardware timestamp registers > > >> (E1000_SYSTIML/E1000_SYSTIMH) instead of using system clock_gettime(). > > >> > > >> This ensures that the clock reading is consistent with the hardware's > > >> internal time base used for Qbv cycle and launch time scheduling, > > >> providing better accuracy for Time-Sensitive Networking applications. > > >> > > >> Fixes: 9630f7c71ecd ("net/igc: enable launch time offloading") > > >> Cc: [email protected] > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: David Zage <[email protected]> > > >> Signed-off-by: Song Yoong Siang <[email protected]> > > >> --- > > >> v1: https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20251107031507.3890366-1- > > >[email protected]/ > > >> > > >> changelog: > > >> v1 -> v2 > > >> - reuse the existing eth_igc_timesync_read_time() (Soumyadeep). > > >> --- > > >> drivers/net/intel/e1000/igc_ethdev.c | 12 +++++++++--- > > >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > >> > > >> diff --git a/drivers/net/intel/e1000/igc_ethdev.c > > >b/drivers/net/intel/e1000/igc_ethdev.c > > >> index b9c91d2446..d4edc82668 100644 > > >> --- a/drivers/net/intel/e1000/igc_ethdev.c > > >> +++ b/drivers/net/intel/e1000/igc_ethdev.c > > >> @@ -2813,6 +2813,12 @@ eth_igc_timesync_read_time(struct rte_eth_dev > > >> *dev, > > >struct timespec *ts) > > >> { > > >> struct e1000_hw *hw = IGC_DEV_PRIVATE_HW(dev); > > >> > > >> + /* > > >> + * Reading the SYSTIML register latches the upper 32 bits to > > >> the SYSTIMH > > >> + * shadow register for coherent access. As long as we read > > >> SYSTIML first > > >> + * followed by SYSTIMH, we avoid race conditions where the time > > >> rolls > > >> + * over between the two register reads. > > >> + */ > > > > > >Not sure this is true. If the nsec value == 999,999,999 on read, then the > > >rollover occurs, the resulting timestamp will be almost 1 second out, > > >right? > > > > Thanks for your comment. > > > > According to Section 7.5.1.3.1 of the Intel(r) Ethernet Controller I225/I226 > > Software User Manual (Revision 1.4.5), the hardware provides atomic access > > to the timestamp through a latching mechanism: When SYSTIML is read, the > > hardware automatically latches the upper 32 bits into a SYSTIMH shadow > > register. This ensures that subsequent reads of SYSTIMH return the value > > that was present at the time SYSTIML was read, providing coherent access to > > the full timestamp. Therefore, the SYSTIML-first, SYSTIMH-second read > > sequence is guaranteed by hardware to be atomic and eliminates the rollover > > race condition you mentioned. > > > > Great, thanks for clarifying! > > Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <[email protected]> > Applied to dpdk-next-net-intel.
Thanks, /Bruce
