This is an automated email from git. It was generated because a ref
change was pushed to the "chrony/chrony.git" repository.
The branch, master has been updated
via 11f7cc05072fef4e533bba9b385d0cb514153324 (commit)
via a4f28892a5b36ed04fab9be95ac62c3095e6fd6a (commit)
via 5
Unfortunately, I’ve not yet received any response on the Intel list. While it’s
quite clear that both the i211 and i354 require some compensation, I don’t have
a good way to determine it other than by shots in the dark. The i211 seems to
correspond with the i210 correction parameters, so I am cu
Also, would it be possible to allow hardware timestamps to be used on one
interface, and software timestamps on another (without falling back to daemon
timestamps)?
Thanks,
Denny
--
To unsubscribe email chrony-dev-requ...@chrony.tuxfamily.org with "unsubscribe"
in the subject.
For help email
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 05:03:15PM -0800, Denny Page wrote:
> Unfortunately, I’ve not yet received any response on the Intel list. While
> it’s quite clear that both the i211 and i354 require some compensation, I
> don’t have a good way to determine it other than by shots in the dark. The
> i211
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 06:44:38PM -0800, Denny Page wrote:
> Also, would it be possible to allow hardware timestamps to be used on one
> interface, and software timestamps on another (without falling back to daemon
> timestamps)?
I tried that, but there seem to be some limitations in the kernel
