I decided to improve the subject for any ongoing discussion around
hardware timestamping in 7.4.
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> No, that won't work. The filter applies to received packets. If an
> interface doesn't have HWTSTAMP_FILTER_ALL, it can still generate
> tran
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 11:21:29AM -0400, Chris Perl wrote:
> When 7.4 lands (and/or on 7.3 using your copr repo if there is only
> one card), if I have a card that doesn't support HWTSTAMP_FILTER_ALL,
> will I be able to use hardware timestamping for the transmit
> timestamps and use kernel timest
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> That's an interesting idea. Do you think people would prefer SW RX+HW
> TX timestamping over SW RX+SW TX?
"SW" in this context means kernel timestamps, right?
When I sent that email I was thinking it would be nice. But, now I'm not sur
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 12:11:36PM -0400, Chris Perl wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Miroslav Lichvar
> wrote:
> > That's an interesting idea. Do you think people would prefer SW RX+HW
> > TX timestamping over SW RX+SW TX?
>
> "SW" in this context means kernel timestamps, right?
Yes.
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 1:10 PM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> I think we can support it, at least with a new option that would
> disable the filter. I actually have a patch in my queue to allow
> disabling the new NTP-specific filter, which should be added in 4.13
> (although there is currently no HW
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 02:38:26PM -0400, Chris Perl wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 1:10 PM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> > I think we can support it, at least with a new option that would
> > disable the filter. I actually have a patch in my queue to allow
> > disabling the new NTP-specific filter
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> It's the patch included in the package from the copr repo. Does it not
> work for you?
Oh, sorry that wasn't clear to me and I haven't had a chance to test
with it yet.
Is there something included in the copr repo that isn't in the git
r
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Chris Perl wrote:
> Is there something included in the copr repo that isn't in the git
> repo? I'm not that familiar with copr, but based on what I have read,
> I wouldn't think so.
>
> If not, I'd prefer to just build from git. Assuming the relevant
> changes ar
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 02:49:39PM -0400, Chris Perl wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> > It's the patch included in the package from the copr repo. Does it not
> > work for you?
>
> Oh, sorry that wasn't clear to me and I haven't had a chance to test
> with it ye
I just tested and it works perfectly, thanks.
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 02:49:39PM -0400, Chris Perl wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Miroslav Lichvar
>> wrote:
>> > It's the patch included in the package from the copr repo. Doe
I have a setup that looks like the following:
GPS Receiver -- PTP --> machine_a -- NTP --> machine_b
Where:
These machines are all pretty close together (the switching latency
between them should be something like 10us).
machine_a is running linuxptp and chrony with a shared memory region
via t
11 matches
Mail list logo
