On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 04:26:53PM -0700, Richard Cochran wrote: > On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 09:41:06AM +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > > It seems you are set on this terminology. I think it would work for > > me, although in my head I mostly see the packets on the network > > instead of a time signal. Have you considered adopting a server/client > > terminology like NTP is using? I know some people that use it with PTP > > and maybe it would be easier for a wider adoption. > > I considered that, but ... > > How would you feel about client/server terminology in the context of > phc2sys?
That wouldn't work well, but as phc2sys doesn't use PTP to synchronize the clocks, I think it can use a different terminology than ptp4l. It might actually be less confusing. In the current code the same clock is master and slave at the same time in different contexts. -- Miroslav Lichvar _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel