> -----Original Message-----
> From: Miroslav Lichvar <mlich...@redhat.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2021 4:10 AM
> To: Eric Decker <edec...@oldi.com>
> Cc: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com>; linuxptp-
> de...@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH] Increase the default
> tx_timestamp_timeout
> to 5
>
> On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 01:37:38AM +0000, Eric Decker wrote:
> > If the timestamp is available in less than the timeout (5ms) will it still
> > wait for
> the timeout, or continue processing after the timestamp is received?
>
> The poll() call is waiting for the descriptor, so it should return as
> soon as the timestamp is ready. The option sets the maximum time it
> waits.
>
> I'm ok with increasing the default timeout.
>
> As a future improvement, maybe it could be adaptive, e.g. once in a
> while try waiting much longer and if that doesn't give a timestamp
> stick to a shorter interval. That is, try to detect when the hardware
> is not able to timestamp all packets.
>
Not sure I follow here. I guess we'd default to a long timeout and periodically
try shorter ones? I'm not sure this would be effective. I think the complexity
isn't really worth it.
_______________________________________________
Linuxptp-devel mailing list
Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
