Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1456690

RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] e1000e: factor out systim sanitization

Show all headers | View raw

> From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:intel-wired-lan-bounces@lists.osuosl.org] On
> Behalf Of Woodford, Timothy W.
> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2016 7:41 AM
> To: Woodford, Timothy W. <Timothy.Woodford@jhuapl.edu>; Avargil,
> Raanan <raanan.avargil@intel.com>; Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>;
> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Hall, Christopher S
> <christopher.s.hall@intel.com>
> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org
> Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] e1000e: factor out
> systim sanitization
> 
> >>> This is prepatory work for an expanding list of adapter families that have
> occasional ~10 hour clock jumps when being used for PTP. Factor out the
> sanitization function and convert to using a feature (bug) flag, per suggestion
> from Jesse Brandeburg.
> >>>
> >>> Littering functional code with device-specific checks is much messier than
> simply checking a flag, and having device-specific init set flags as needed.
> >>> There are probably a number of other cases in the e1000e code that
> could/should be converted similarly.
> >>
> >> Looks ok to me.
> >> Adding Chris who asked what happens if we reach the max retry counter
> (E1000_MAX_82574_SYSTIM_REREAD)?
> >> This counter is set to 50.
> >> Can you, for testing purposes, decreased this value (or even set it to 0)
> and see what happens?
> >  I'll set the max retry counter to 1 and run an overnight test to see what
> happens.
> 
> After running with this configuration for about 36 hours, I haven't seen any
> timing jumps.  Either this configuration eliminates the error, or it makes it
> significantly less likely to occur.
> 
> Tim Woodford

Feel free to throw a Tested-by: on it if you like.  Not a big deal either way, I managed to get enough cycles in on it I'm pretty happy with it as well.

> _______________________________________________
> Intel-wired-lan mailing list
> Intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org
> http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-wired-lan

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH net-next v3 1/2] e1000e: factor out systim sanitization Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> - 2016-07-26 20:30 +0200
  RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] e1000e: factor out  systim sanitization "Avargil, Raanan" <raanan.avargil@intel.com> - 2016-07-27 16:10 +0200
    Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] e1000e: factor out  systim sanitization Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> - 2016-07-27 17:10 +0200
      Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] e1000e: factor out  systim sanitization Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> - 2016-08-02 03:40 +0200
        RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] e1000e: factor out  systim sanitization "Brown, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@intel.com> - 2016-08-02 12:30 +0200
    RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] e1000e: factor out  systim sanitization "Woodford, Timothy W." <Timothy.Woodford@jhuapl.edu> - 2016-07-27 23:30 +0200
      RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] e1000e: factor out  systim sanitization "Woodford, Timothy W." <Timothy.Woodford@jhuapl.edu> - 2016-07-29 16:50 +0200
        RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] e1000e: factor out  systim sanitization "Brown, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@intel.com> - 2016-08-04 21:40 +0200
  RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] e1000e: factor out  systim sanitization "Brown, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@intel.com> - 2016-08-04 21:40 +0200

csiph-web