Hi Miroslav,

On Thu, 2 Jun 2022 at 15:01, Miroslav Lichvar <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 02, 2022 at 12:33:21PM +0530, Devasish Dey wrote:
> > NO_DELAY mechanism address when user or system does not have any delay
> > measurement mechanism. The Newly introduced options for ts_proc gives
> users
> > clear indication that delay measurement mechanism is not going to be used
> > in this mode of operation.
>
> Even if we ignore the technical aspect of the implementation, I think
> it would not be very user friendly to have to set two different
> options to get it working.
>
> > Currently we do not see any available option to work with no_delay
> > mechanism. If we need to use the same option as suggested we need to
> update
> > the existing behavior.
>
> You could change the behavior of the initial_delay option to accept
> zero as a valid value, but that would break compatibility with
> existing configuration files that set it to 0 for "no value".
>
> I'd suggest to call tsproc_set_delay() in handle_state_decision_event(),
> which already does that for the initial_delay option. The condition
> could be extended like this:
>
>         if (!tmv_is_zero(c->initial_delay) || best_dm == DM_NO_MECHANISM)
>                 tsproc_set_delay(c->tsproc, c->initial_delay);
>
This is not going to work. As the delay mechanism is per port configuration
so cannot be applied at the clock level.
TS_PROC is also a per port configuration.

or maybe there could be a separate call further down in handling of
> the PS_SLAVE case. You would need to add a new port function to get
> its delay mechanism.
>
> Also, I'd suggest to rename the DM constant and user setting to
> DM_NONE and "none" to make it shorter and less ugly. I don't think we
> need to follow the spec here literally.
>
We would like to follow it as per spec as it is easy for everyone to
understand the code and easily co-relate with the standards.
Since E2E/P2P was named as DM_XXX, we were in perception that you had
followed the standard while adding the enums.
We are planning to add other remaining delay mechanisms as well.
[image: image.png]
Thanks,
Devasish Dey
SyncMonk Technologies
_______________________________________________
Linuxptp-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel

Reply via email to