Re: [PATCH v5] posix-timers: add multi_clock_gettime system call
From: Sagi Maimon <hidden>
Date: 2024-01-03 13:00:05
Also in:
linux-arch, lkml, netdev
On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 12:22 PM Arnd Bergmann [off-list ref] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 2, 2024, at 10:18, Sagi Maimon wrote:quoted
Some user space applications need to read some clocks. Each read requires moving from user space to kernel space. The syscall overhead causes unpredictable delay between N clocks reads Removing this delay causes better synchronization between N clocks. Introduce a new system call multi_clock_gettime, which can be used to measure the offset between multiple clocks, from variety of types: PHC, virtual PHC and various system clocks (CLOCK_REALTIME, CLOCK_MONOTONIC, etc). The offset includes the total time that the driver needs to read the clock timestamp. New system call allows the reading of a list of clocks - up to PTP_MAX_CLOCKS. Supported clocks IDs: PHC, virtual PHC and various system clocks. Up to PTP_MAX_SAMPLES times (per clock) in a single system call read. The system call returns n_clocks timestamps for each measurement: - clock 0 timestamp - ... - clock n timestamp Signed-off-by: Sagi Maimon <redacted> --- Changes since version 4: - fix error : 'struct __ptp_multi_clock_get' declared inside parameter list will not be visible outside of this definition or declarationI usually put all the changes for previous versions in a list here, it helps reviewers.
Will be done on patch V6.
The changes you made for previous versions all look good to me, but I think there is still a few things worth considering. I'll also follow up on the earlier threads.quoted
+#define MULTI_PTP_MAX_CLOCKS 32 /* Max number of clocks */ +#define MULTI_PTP_MAX_SAMPLES 32 /* Max allowed offset measurement samples. */ + +struct __ptp_multi_clock_get { + unsigned int n_clocks; /* Desired number of clocks. */ + unsigned int n_samples; /* Desired number of measurements per clock. */ + clockid_t clkid_arr[MULTI_PTP_MAX_CLOCKS]; /* list of clock IDs */ + /* + * Array of list of n_clocks clocks time samples n_samples times. + */ + struct __kernel_timespec ts[MULTI_PTP_MAX_SAMPLES][MULTI_PTP_MAX_CLOCKS]; +};Since you now access each member individually, I think it makes more sense here to just pass these as four register arguments. It helps with argument introspection, avoids a couple of get_user(), and lets you remove the fixed array dimensions.
I prefer the use of get_user(), I will use it to remove the fixed array dimensions. which will be done on patch V6.
quoted
+SYSCALL_DEFINE1(multi_clock_gettime, struct __ptp_multi_clock_get __user *, ptp_multi_clk_get) +{ + const struct k_clock *kc; + struct timespec64 *kernel_tp; + struct timespec64 *kernel_tp_base; + unsigned int n_clocks; /* Desired number of clocks. */ + unsigned int n_samples; /* Desired number of measurements per clock. */ + unsigned int i, j; + clockid_t clkid_arr[MULTI_PTP_MAX_CLOCKS]; /* list of clock IDs */ + int error = 0; + + if (copy_from_user(&n_clocks, &ptp_multi_clk_get->n_clocks, sizeof(n_clocks))) + return -EFAULT; + if (copy_from_user(&n_samples, &ptp_multi_clk_get->n_samples, sizeof(n_samples)))If these remain as struct members rather than register arguments, you should use get_user() instead of copy_from_user().
Will be done on patch V6
quoted
+ kernel_tp_base = kmalloc_array(n_clocks * n_samples, + sizeof(struct timespec64), GFP_KERNEL); + if (!kernel_tp_base) + return -ENOMEM;To be on the safe side regarding possible data leak, maybe use kcalloc() instead of kmalloc_array() here.
Will be done on patch V6.
quoted
+ kernel_tp = kernel_tp_base; + for (j = 0; j < n_samples; j++) { + for (i = 0; i < n_clocks; i++) { + if (put_timespec64(kernel_tp++, (struct __kernel_timespec __user *) + &ptp_multi_clk_get->ts[j][i])) {I think the typecast here can be removed.
You are right, will be fixed on patch V6.
Arnd
Thanks for your Notes.