> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jacob Keller <[email protected]> 
> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2026 4:57 PM
> To: Intel Wired LAN <[email protected]>; Machnikowski, Maciej 
> <[email protected]>; Keller, Jacob E <[email protected]>; 
> Korba, Przemyslaw <[email protected]>; Nguyen, Anthony L 
> <[email protected]>; Nitka, Grzegorz <[email protected]>; 
> Kubalewski, Arkadiusz <[email protected]>
> Cc: Keller, Jacob E <[email protected]>
> Subject: [PATCH iwl-net v3 04/15] ice: set in_use only after preparing Tx 
> timestamp index
> 
> The ice_ptp_request_ts() function is used to request a timestamp index for 
> use with a packet. When reserving an index, it sets the start time and saves 
> a pointer to the skb into the appropriate index. The function marks the 
> in_use bit first before doing any of these steps. The IRQ handler which 
> clears the timestamps reads the in_use bits uses a lockless flow for reading 
> the in_use bits to determine which ones are in-use. This is necessary as 
> actually processing a complete timestamp must be able to sleep so we cannot 
> hold the timestamp tracker lock over the entire sequence.
> Additionally, blocking the Tx hotpath with such a lock indefinitely would be 
> problematic.
> 
> However, the existing flow now has a very narrow window where the IRQ handler 
> could see a timestamp as in-use but read a stale value for its "start" time.
> 
> Fix this by ordering the sequence to mark the in_use bit last, and add a 
> memory barrier to prevent re-ordering of the previous writes to setup the 
> index.
> 
> This was found and reported by Sashiko while reviewing an unrelated change.
> 
> Closes: 
> https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260821-jk-e825c-minimized-fixes-v1-0-9d0731eb4858%40intel.com?part=7
> Fixes: ea9b847cda64 ("ice: enable transmit timestamps for E810 devices")
> Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller <[email protected]>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_ptp.c | 9 +++++++--
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Tested-by: Alexander Nowlin <[email protected]>

Reply via email to