On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 06:13:08PM -0700, Joe Williams wrote: > Hello list, > > I have chrony working great using interleaved mode between two machines > that have both RX and TX hardware timestamping. It's far more common for > NICs to support TX timestamps in HW rather than both TX and RX. It seems > like in that case the RX timestamps would fall back to happening in the > kernel, while TX would stay in hardware. The xleave docs only mention TX > timestamps, while the RFC draft mentions both RX and TX. So it's not > totally clear to me how much HW RX timestamps matter to interleaved mode.
Interleaved mode matters only for TX timestamps. RX timestamps are the same in basic and interleaved mode. > For clients or servers that don't support HW RX timestamping (only TX) how > much precision would I be giving up? As compared to a fully HW timestamping? The main issue would be the asymmetry. RX timestamps will likely have a much larger error, e.g. few microseconds vs sub-microsecond in the TX timestamp. The loss of stability will depend on which direction has more network jitter. If it's mostly on the RX path, it might not be so bad as chrony would stick to the more stable TX direction. -- Miroslav Lichvar -- To unsubscribe email chrony-users-requ...@chrony.tuxfamily.org with "unsubscribe" in the subject. For help email chrony-users-requ...@chrony.tuxfamily.org with "help" in the subject. Trouble? Email listmas...@chrony.tuxfamily.org.
