On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 09:53:42AM -0700, Richard Cochran wrote: > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 11:58:41AM +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > > > 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. > > So how about using client/server in the context of the PTP and > source/sink in phc2sys and ts2phc?
Yes, I think I would prefer that over source/sink everywhere. To me, server and client are network-related terms, something implementing a network protocol, which in context of PTP has a single clock. Sink and source work as more general terms. As an adjective of a clock, "source clock" works well, but "sink clock" sounds weird to me. I found this term in some DisplayPort and HDMI documentation. Maybe it's alright, I don't know. Native speakers should give you a better feedback or suggestions. -- Miroslav Lichvar _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
