From: "Théo Lebrun" <theo.lebrun@bootlin.com>
To: "James Clark" <jjc@jclark.com>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "Richard Cochran" <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
"Conor Dooley" <conor.dooley@microchip.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>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Nicolai Buchwitz" <nb@tipi-net.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] net: macb: fix ordering around PTP timestamp read
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 09:13:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DLBG7UPDG84Y.18RL7VOGSDMQY@bootlin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260910040658.18359-1-jjc@jclark.com>
Hello James,
On Thu Sep 10, 2026 at 6:06 AM CEST, James Clark wrote:
> PTP_SYS_OFFSET_EXTENDED returns system timestamps that do not correctly
> bracket the PHC register read on MACB/GEM. On a Raspberry Pi 5, the
> returned interval can be as short as 37 ns, while an ordered register
> read takes approximately 1 us. This biases the midpoint used by phc2sys,
> causing CLOCK_REALTIME to run approximately 0.5 us ahead when synchronized
> to the PHC.
>
> gem_tsu_get_time() reads the nanoseconds register using the driver's
> relaxed MMIO accessor. On weakly ordered systems, the subsequent system
> timestamp can be taken before the register read completes. The internal
> smp_rmb() in the pre-timestamp path also does not guarantee ordering
> against the subsequent MMIO read.
>
> Add rmb() before and after the bracketed nanoseconds read in both the
> normal and seconds rollover paths so the system timestamps bracket the
> PHC read. Adding the post-read barrier increases the minimum interval on
> the same Raspberry Pi 5 to approximately 1 us.
>
> Fixes: e51bb5c2784c ("net: macb: ptp: Switch to gettimex64() interface")
> Tested-by: Nicolai Buchwitz <nb@tipi-net.de> # Raspberry Pi CM5, min bracket 37 ns -> 981 ns
> Reviewed-by: Nicolai Buchwitz <nb@tipi-net.de>
> Signed-off-by: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - Add rmb() before the PHC read in both paths, following Théo Lebrun's
> feedback. Explain why the pre-timestamp path's smp_rmb() is insufficient
> for MMIO ordering.
> - Wrap the post-read barrier comments.
> - Add Nicolai Buchwitz's Tested-by and Reviewed-by tags.
> - Drop RFC.
>
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20260908053150.28694-1-jjc@jclark.com/
>
> Nicolai's review and testing were on v1. The additional pre-read barriers
> in v2 address Théo's feedback.
[...]
> drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb_ptp.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb_ptp.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb_ptp.c
> index e5195d7da..4fb287608 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb_ptp.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb_ptp.c
> @@ -50,7 +50,15 @@ static int gem_tsu_get_time(struct ptp_clock_info *ptp, struct timespec64 *ts,
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&bp->tsu_clk_lock, flags);
> ptp_read_system_prets(sts);
> + /* ptp_read_system_prets() uses smp_rmb() internally,
> + * which does not guarantee ordering against MMIO reads.
> + */
> + rmb();
> first = gem_readl(bp, TN);
> + /* Ensure the PHC read completes before taking
> + * the post timestamp.
> + */
> + rmb();
> ptp_read_system_postts(sts);
> secl = gem_readl(bp, TSL);
> sech = gem_readl(bp, TSH);
> @@ -62,7 +70,15 @@ static int gem_tsu_get_time(struct ptp_clock_info *ptp, struct timespec64 *ts,
> * (assume all done within 1s)
> */
> ptp_read_system_prets(sts);
> + /* ptp_read_system_prets() uses smp_rmb() internally,
> + * which does not guarantee ordering against MMIO reads.
> + */
> + rmb();
> ts->tv_nsec = gem_readl(bp, TN);
> + /* Ensure the PHC read completes before taking
> + * the post timestamp.
> + */
> + rmb();
> ptp_read_system_postts(sts);
> secl = gem_readl(bp, TSL);
> sech = gem_readl(bp, TSH);
Honestly I wouldn't be surprised to see this code without comments.
Especially as the rmb() were added in a separate commit so git
blame/log will point to your commit message which is plentiful. It
would have been different if the rmb were part of the commit
introducing gettimex64 support, with a commit message which would
probably not talk about why rmb are required.
Don't bother sending a new revision just for that though!
With or without the code comments:
Reviewed-by: Théo Lebrun <theo.lebrun@bootlin.com>
Thanks James,
--
Théo Lebrun, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-10 7:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-10 4:06 James Clark
2026-09-10 7:13 ` Théo Lebrun [this message]
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=DLBG7UPDG84Y.18RL7VOGSDMQY@bootlin.com \
--to=theo.lebrun@bootlin.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=conor.dooley@microchip.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=jjc@jclark.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nb@tipi-net.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
/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®