> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Cochran <richardcoch...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2021 6:36 PM
> To: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com>
> Cc: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] tx_timestamp_timeout default
>
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 11:46:16PM +0000, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
>
> > Either way, I found that whether I used a kthread or not I was
> > unable to avoid the timeout issue with ice hardware because the
> > delay is caused by the method we must use to access the Tx
> > timestamps :( We get into the kthread function within a few hundred
> > usec or less, and then the firmware read takes a long time,
> > sometimes over 2 milliseconds.
>
> Yes, but when using "work" that 2 ms can easily become 200 ms or more
> on a busy RT system. The work is sched_other, and as such it is
> effectively running at the lowest priority WRT the sched_fifo tasks.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
Right, I agree we definitely still need kthreads + priority.
_______________________________________________
Linuxptp-devel mailing list
Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
