From: Rodolfo Giometti <giometti@enneenne.com>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] pps: Always use ktime_get_snapshot_id() for pps_get_ts()
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 17:35:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <920a2d70-c1ec-452b-8fc4-aebf1f6af412@enneenne.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260829210041.40649-4-dwmw2@infradead.org>
On Sat, 2026-08-29 at 21:57 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> Rather than using that more accurate timestamp *only* in the case where
> CONFIG_NTP_PPS is enabled, do so unconditionally.
>
> static inline void pps_get_ts(struct pps_event_time *ts)
> {
> -#ifdef CONFIG_NTP_PPS
> struct system_time_snapshot snap;
>
> ktime_get_snapshot_id(CLOCK_REALTIME, &snap);
> ts->ts_real = ktime_to_timespec64(snap.systime);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_NTP_PPS
> ts->ts_raw = ktime_to_timespec64(snap.monoraw);
> -#else
> - ktime_get_real_ts64(&ts->ts_real);
> #endif
> }
Why are you removing ktime_get_real_ts64()?
The commit message says you are using the more accurate timestamp
unconditionally. What the diff does is delete the !CONFIG_NTP_PPS
branch. Those are not the same thing, and the second one changes an
ABI: ts_real reaches userspace through PPS_FETCH on /dev/ppsN and
through /sys/class/pps/ppsX/assert, documented in
Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-pps and unchanged since 2008. Until
now it came from ktime_get_real_ts64(), the same clock userspace reads
with clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME). After your patch it does not.
That needs a good reason and the commit message does not give one.
Give me that first. Until then the details do not matter.
Separately: are we sure that calling ktime_get_snapshot_id() does not
introduce much larger delays than ktime_get_real_ts64()? pps_get_ts()
runs in hard IRQ, and in pps-gpio it is the first statement of the
handler. Whatever it costs sits between the edge and the timestamp,
and that is the one thing PPS has to keep short.
I would like to see that measured on something other than an x86 VM
with a TSC. A small 32-bit ARM board is what I worry about.
Rodolfo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-01 15:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-29 20:56 [PATCH v4 0/4] Add ntp_error to clock snapshot, enable NTP_PPS on tickless kernel David Woodhouse
2026-08-29 20:56 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] timekeeping: Apply extrapolated ntp_error to clock snapshots David Woodhouse
2026-08-29 20:57 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] pps: Drop the !NO_HZ_COMMON dependency from NTP_PPS David Woodhouse
2026-09-01 15:35 ` Rodolfo Giometti
2026-09-02 0:13 ` David Woodhouse
2026-08-29 20:57 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] pps: Always use ktime_get_snapshot_id() for pps_get_ts() David Woodhouse
2026-09-01 15:35 ` Rodolfo Giometti [this message]
2026-09-01 23:56 ` David Woodhouse
2026-08-29 20:57 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] [DO NOT MERGE] ptp: ptp_vmclock: Add simulated 1PPS support David Woodhouse
2026-09-01 15:35 ` [PATCH v4 0/4] Add ntp_error to clock snapshot, enable NTP_PPS on tickless kernel Rodolfo Giometti
2026-09-01 23:37 ` David Woodhouse
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=920a2d70-c1ec-452b-8fc4-aebf1f6af412@enneenne.com \
--to=giometti@enneenne.com \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=dwmw@amazon.co.uk \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=jstultz@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mlichvar@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®