On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:53:37PM +0000, Daniel Le wrote: > > Meanwhile, I might get started with software timestamping in a Linux > kernel version 2.6.30+ and just wanted to double check that I don't > have to back port the PHC and can safely ignore the phc2sys program > in this case?
When ptp4l uses SW time stamps, then phc2sys is not needed. > Only changes to PTP protocol stack in the user space > will be necessary, i.e. to the ptp4l end in terms of getting > timestamps and custom clock control, and optionally pmc? My platform > has TX/RX FPGA-based hardware timestamping from a NIC. The system > clock is synchronized with PTP first, then the NIC clock is > synchronized to the system clock, in reverse sync direction in > comparison to the PHC hardware timestamping. This does not sound like SW time stamping to me. Thanks, Richard ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data. Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing & Easy Data Exploration http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
