Re: [PATCH net v2] net: ethernet: ti: am65-cpts: Fix PTPv1 message type on TX packets

[Ravi Gunasekaran <r-gunasekaran@ti.com>]

Ed,

On 4/25/24 7:06 AM, Trexel, Ed wrote:
> From: Ravi Gunasekaran <r-gunasekaran@ti.com> 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2024 1:16 AM
> To: s-vadapalli@ti.com; rogerq@kernel.org; r-gunasekaran@ti.com
> Cc: davem@davemloft.net; edumazet@google.com; kuba@kernel.org; pabeni@redhat.com; richardcochran@gmail.com; jreeder@ti.com; netdev@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; srk@ti.com; Trexel, Ed <ed.trexel@hp.com>
> Subject: [PATCH net v2] net: ethernet: ti: am65-cpts: Fix PTPv1 message type on TX packets
> 
> CAUTION: External Email 
> From: Jason Reeder <mailto:jreeder@ti.com>
> 
> The CPTS, by design, captures the messageType (Sync, Delay_Req, etc.)
> field from the second nibble of the PTP header which is defined in the
> PTPv2 (1588-2008) specification. In the PTPv1 (1588-2002) specification
> the first two bytes of the PTP header are defined as the versionType
> which is always 0x0001. This means that any PTPv1 packets that are
> tagged for TX timestamping by the CPTS will have their messageType set
> to 0x0 which corresponds to a Sync message type. This causes issues
> when a PTPv1 stack is expecting a Delay_Req (messageType: 0x1)
> timestamp that never appears.
> 
> Fix this by checking if the ptp_class of the timestamped TX packet is
> PTP_CLASS_V1 and then matching the PTP sequence ID to the stored
> sequence ID in the skb->cb data structure. If the sequence IDs match
> and the packet is of type PTPv1 then there is a chance that the
> messageType has been incorrectly stored by the CPTS so overwrite the
> messageType stored by the CPTS with the messageType from the skb->cb
> data structure. This allows the PTPv1 stack to receive TX timestamps
> for Delay_Req packets which are necessary to lock onto a PTP Leader.
> 
> Fixes: f6bd59526ca5 ("net: ethernet: ti: introduce am654 common platform time sync driver")
> Signed-off-by: Jason Reeder <mailto:jreeder@ti.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ravi Gunasekaran <mailto:r-gunasekaran@ti.com>
> Tested-by: Ed Trexel <ed.trexel@hp.com>

Seems like your email client is not configured as per guidelines [1].
Also Tested-by reply is not inline with norm.

Once your mail client is configured correctly, could you please reply
with your "Tested-by" tag to the original patch mail?

[1] - https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.10/process/email-clients.html 

-- 
Regards,
Ravi