All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Machnikowski, Maciej" <maciej.machnikowski@intel.com>
To: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org"
	<intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
	"abyagowi@fb.com" <abyagowi@fb.com>,
	"Nguyen, Anthony L" <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org"
	<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC v2 net-next 1/2] rtnetlink: Add new RTM_GETSYNCESTATE message to get SyncE status
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2021 16:42:55 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <PH0PR11MB495126A63998DABA5B5DE184EACA9@PH0PR11MB4951.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210829151017.GA6016@hoboy.vegasvil.org>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
> Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2021 5:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [RFC v2 net-next 1/2] rtnetlink: Add new RTM_GETSYNCESTATE
> message to get SyncE status
> 
> On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 10:05:11AM +0200, Maciej Machnikowski wrote:
> >
> > This patch is SyncE-oriented. Future implementation can add additional
> > functionality for reading different DPLL states using the same structure.
> 
> I would call this more "ice oriented" than SyncE oriented.  I'm not sure there is
> even such a thing as "SyncE DPLL".  Does that term come from 802.3?  To my
> understanding, that is one just way of implementing it that works on super-
> Gigabit speed devices.
> 
Hi,
This interface is ITU-T G.8264 SyncE-oriented. It is meant to monitor the state
of Ethernet Equipment Clock.

ITU-T G.8264 recommendation defines Synchronous Ethernet equipment
as a device  equipped with a system clock (e.g., a synchronous Ethernet
equipment clock). SyncE interfaces are able to extract the received clock
and pass it to a system clock.

Please take a look at the 10.2 Operation modes of the G.8264 and at the Figure A.1
which depicts the EEC. This interface is to report the status of the EEC.

If you prefer EEC over DPLL I'm fine with the name change. I think it will be less confusing.

> I have nothing against exposing the DPLL if you need to, however I'd like to have
> an interface that support plain Gigabit as well.  This could be done in a generic
> way by offering Control Register 9 as described in 802.3.

This part of Gigabit interface is a different part of SyncE device. It controls Master/Slave
operation of auto-negotiation. 
You would use it in slave mode if you want your EEC to tune to the frequency recovered
from network and to master if you use external source for your EEC and want to send it
as a reference for another devices. The decision can be made based on the EEC state
read by the interface proposed in this RFC.

This is a functionality that belongs to a different interface mentioned in the next steps.

Regards
Maciek

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Machnikowski, Maciej <maciej.machnikowski@intel.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC v2 net-next 1/2] rtnetlink: Add new RTM_GETSYNCESTATE message to get SyncE status
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2021 16:42:55 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <PH0PR11MB495126A63998DABA5B5DE184EACA9@PH0PR11MB4951.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210829151017.GA6016@hoboy.vegasvil.org>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
> Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2021 5:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [RFC v2 net-next 1/2] rtnetlink: Add new RTM_GETSYNCESTATE
> message to get SyncE status
> 
> On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 10:05:11AM +0200, Maciej Machnikowski wrote:
> >
> > This patch is SyncE-oriented. Future implementation can add additional
> > functionality for reading different DPLL states using the same structure.
> 
> I would call this more "ice oriented" than SyncE oriented.  I'm not sure there is
> even such a thing as "SyncE DPLL".  Does that term come from 802.3?  To my
> understanding, that is one just way of implementing it that works on super-
> Gigabit speed devices.
> 
Hi,
This interface is ITU-T G.8264 SyncE-oriented. It is meant to monitor the state
of Ethernet Equipment Clock.

ITU-T G.8264 recommendation defines Synchronous Ethernet equipment
as a device  equipped with a system clock (e.g., a synchronous Ethernet
equipment clock). SyncE interfaces are able to extract the received clock
and pass it to a system clock.

Please take a look at the 10.2 Operation modes of the G.8264 and at the Figure A.1
which depicts the EEC. This interface is to report the status of the EEC.

If you prefer EEC over DPLL I'm fine with the name change. I think it will be less confusing.

> I have nothing against exposing the DPLL if you need to, however I'd like to have
> an interface that support plain Gigabit as well.  This could be done in a generic
> way by offering Control Register 9 as described in 802.3.

This part of Gigabit interface is a different part of SyncE device. It controls Master/Slave
operation of auto-negotiation. 
You would use it in slave mode if you want your EEC to tune to the frequency recovered
from network and to master if you use external source for your EEC and want to send it
as a reference for another devices. The decision can be made based on the EEC state
read by the interface proposed in this RFC.

This is a functionality that belongs to a different interface mentioned in the next steps.

Regards
Maciek

  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-29 16:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-29  8:05 [RFC v2 net-next 0/2] Add RTNL interface for SyncE Maciej Machnikowski
2021-08-29  8:05 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Maciej Machnikowski
2021-08-29  8:05 ` [RFC v2 net-next 1/2] rtnetlink: Add new RTM_GETSYNCESTATE message to get SyncE status Maciej Machnikowski
2021-08-29  8:05   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Maciej Machnikowski
2021-08-29 15:10   ` Richard Cochran
2021-08-29 15:10     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Richard Cochran
2021-08-29 16:42     ` Machnikowski, Maciej [this message]
2021-08-29 16:42       ` Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-08-29 20:16       ` Andrew Lunn
2021-08-29 20:16         ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Andrew Lunn
2021-08-30 20:57       ` Richard Cochran
2021-08-30 20:57         ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Richard Cochran
2021-08-30 23:29         ` Jakub Kicinski
2021-08-30 23:29           ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2021-08-31 10:20           ` Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-08-31 10:20             ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-08-31 13:33             ` Jakub Kicinski
2021-08-31 13:33               ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2021-08-31 14:07               ` Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-08-31 14:07                 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-08-31 14:18                 ` Jakub Kicinski
2021-08-31 14:18                   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2021-08-31 15:19                   ` Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-08-31 15:19                     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-08-31 15:32                     ` Jakub Kicinski
2021-08-31 15:32                       ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2021-08-31 16:00                       ` Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-08-31 16:00                         ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-08-31 16:19           ` Richard Cochran
2021-08-31 16:19             ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Richard Cochran
2021-08-31 22:09             ` Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-08-31 22:09               ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-09-01  2:02               ` Jakub Kicinski
2021-09-01  2:02                 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2021-09-01  2:56                 ` Richard Cochran
2021-09-01  2:56                   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Richard Cochran
2021-09-01  1:58             ` Jakub Kicinski
2021-09-01  1:58               ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2021-09-01  2:55               ` Richard Cochran
2021-09-01  2:55                 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Richard Cochran
2021-08-29  8:05 ` [RFC v2 net-next 2/2] ice: add support for reading SyncE DPLL state Maciej Machnikowski
2021-08-29  8:05   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Maciej Machnikowski
2021-08-29 11:11   ` kernel test robot

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=PH0PR11MB495126A63998DABA5B5DE184EACA9@PH0PR11MB4951.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=maciej.machnikowski@intel.com \
    --cc=abyagowi@fb.com \
    --cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.