On Tue, 2016-10-18 at 20:47 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 05:19:51PM +0100, Kieran Tyrrell wrote:
> >
> > So reading the TSICR register acknowledges the interrupt and clears
> > the register. If another tsync interrupt occurs while in the
> > interrupt handler, the
On Tue, 2016-10-18 at 08:38 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 08:39:16PM +0000, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> >
> > Sounds good to me. I don't have any current issues, but being able
> > to
> > let people know that the RTNL link handling will be in 1
On Mon, 2016-10-17 at 16:33 +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> When there are multiple instances of ptp4l or phc2sys running on the
> system, it's difficult to tell which message belongs to which
> instance. The first patch adds new options to ptp4l and phc2sys which
> can be used to specify a
On Sun, 2016-10-16 at 13:09 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> Dear linuxptp users and developers,
>
> I am planning to release version 1.8 in one week, without any major
> new features, in order to fix the regression in version 1.7.
>
> [ Sound familiar? The same thing happened to 1.6. I don't
On Wed, 2016-08-03 at 14:49 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> Contrary to the letter of the standard, we do not throw a state
> decision
> event every announce interval, but only when the inputs to the
> algorithm
> have changed. When a port on a BC forms a spanning tree by deciding
> between the
On Fri, 2016-04-15 at 18:50 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 05:31:49PM +0000, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> >
> > Would this make more logical sense as a separate function here?
> Yes, it might look cleaner in a helper function, but that would be a
> follo
Hi,
I am experiencing an interesting issue on some devices. I know the
following scenario is not really a real world setup but it will help
outline the issue and whether we ought to make a change to LinuxPTP.
Say you have 3 netdevices capable of performing hardware timestamping
connected to a
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Cochran [mailto:richardcoch...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2016 6:12 AM
> To: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/6] Prepare for TC, Batch I
>
> This series prepares the way for a Transparent Clock
PTPd was the original implementation. It had no support for real hardware
timestamps. Some device drivers supplied “SW synchronized” hardware stamps that
were fudged to be in the kernel clock time domain. This was driver specific and
was not well documented or supported. Richard Cochran started
On Thu, 2015-11-12 at 14:37 -0600, Bassam Alsanie wrote:
I will be going over the PHC APIs and some of the kernel PHC modules to get
deeper understand.
Just to let you know why my questions seem little bit weird. I am working on
developing a user mode framework for to accessing the hardware
zOn Thu, 2015-11-05 at 17:42 -0600, Bassam Alsanie wrote:
> I have two machines each one has an i210 Ethernet (PTP Enabled)
> connect together via Ethernet cable. I run the ptp4l on both
> machines, but I don't see continues correction or any output messages
> that show the offsets , they are on
On Wed, 2015-11-04 at 18:29 +0100, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 01:46:52PM +, Shlomi Tubul wrote:
>
> > For some reason, I see spikes at clients, which are
> > unreasonable. Most of the time the offset is around +- 200ns,
> > but from time to time it jumps to
On Sat, 2015-09-19 at 21:12 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> Dear linuxptp users and developers,
>
> Nine months since the previous release, I announce version 1.6 of
> linuxptp. I pushed out tag v1.6 and released a tar ball on SF.
Thanks richard. I don't see the v1.6 tag..
Regards,
Jake
On Fri, 2015-08-21 at 10:38 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 10:25:23PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
If I understand this correctly, this means that a user passing a
configuration file missing any option the program reads we will
terminate the whole program instead
-Original Message-
From: Keller, Jacob E [mailto:jacob.e.kel...@intel.com]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 1:54 AM
To: Richard Cochran
Cc: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH RFC v3 00/69] New configuration
implementation
-Original Message
-Original Message-
From: Richard Cochran [mailto:richardcoch...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 8:44 AM
To: Miroslav Lichvar
Cc: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH RFC v3 00/69] New configuration
implementation
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015
-Original Message-
From: Richard Cochran [mailto:richardcoch...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 1:49 PM
To: Keller, Jacob E
Cc: Miroslav Lichvar; linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH RFC v3 00/69] New configuration
implementation
Hi Richard,
This series looks excellent with a few minor questions.
-Original Message-
From: Richard Cochran [mailto:richardcoch...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 1:15 PM
To: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH RFC v3 00/69] New
-Original Message-
From: Richard Cochran [mailto:richardcoch...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 1:15 PM
To: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH RFC v3 23/69] config: convert
'pi_proportional_exponent' to the new scheme.
Signed-off-by:
-Original Message-
From: Richard Cochran [mailto:richardcoch...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 1:15 PM
To: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH RFC v3 27/69] config: convert
'pi_integral_norm_max' to the new scheme.
Signed-off-by:
-Original Message-
From: Richard Cochran [mailto:richardcoch...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 1:15 PM
To: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH RFC v3 26/69] config: convert
'pi_integral_exponent' to the new scheme.
Signed-off-by: Richard
On Thu, 2015-08-13 at 08:20 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:12:57PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
General comments:
it doesn't appear to enforce any specific change on configuration
file
format. I know my earlier proposal was maybe to at some point
update
Hi Richard,
On Wed, 2015-08-12 at 21:45 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
Changes in V2:
- API is much simpler to use
- numerous details in the implementation have been improved
- half dozen legacy options converted
Nice changes. Looks very straight forward to use.
The config code was
On Mon, 2015-08-10 at 23:12 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
This patch adds method to initialize a configuration and look up
values.
All port options are also global option, with the global option
giving the
default value. The port look up method first checks for a port
specific
value,
On Sun, 2015-08-02 at 02:58 +, Gary E. Miller wrote:
Yo Richard!
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 20:09:38 +0200
Richard Cochran richardcoch...@gmail.com wrote:
The configuration file scheme can't do what you want it to do, even
without the ntpshm_segment option.
Yeah, sadly...
On Mon, 2015-08-03 at 22:02 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
I have no problem with adding these options.
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 03:49:43PM +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
+unsigned char udp_ttl = 1;
...
+ if (setsockopt(fd, IPPROTO_IP, IP_MULTICAST_TTL, udp_ttl,
+
On Fri, 2015-07-31 at 18:16 +, Gary E. Miller wrote:
Yo All!
I'd like a config file change to the ptp4l config file.
In this case I have a server with two ethernet segments, and I want
each
one to be on its own SHM. I would like to be able to do this:
[global]
On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 22:06 +, Daniel Le wrote:
My Linux kernel version is 2.6.35.7 and it doesn't seem to have the
implementation of syscall for __NR_clock_adjtime. In which kernel
version was it initially introduced?
I changed the function clock_adjtime() to use adjtimex() as shown
Hi,
Patch looks fine. We generally include a Signed-off-by as is similar to
kernel style, but I'm sure that could be fixed up post-apply by Richard.
Thanks for the fix :)
Regards,
Jake
On Wed, 2015-06-03 at 09:20 +0200, zmoel...@iem.at wrote:
From: IOhannes m zmölnig
Hi,
I am wondering what the expected filters listed in the ethtool -T ioctl
are supposed to be? Precisely, what if we support FILTER_ALL. This means
(by definition) that we support any filter since we can support it as
upscaled to FILTER_ALL
Should a driver report that it supports any particular
Hi,
On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 23:14 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 06:45:56PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
Or should it only list the actual filters it upscales to and not the
more restrictive filters that will still work in the hwtstamp ioctl but
will end up reporting
-Original Message-
From: Richard Cochran [mailto:richardcoch...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 04, 2015 1:27 PM
To: Keller, Jacob E
Cc: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] timecounter mask for non-bitwise
overflowing?
On Sat, Apr 04, 2015 at 12:47
Hey,
I am attempting to use phc2sys and debug some new hardware, and I want
to be able to sort of free-running mode measure the difference clock
offset and frequency offset, but without actually passing corrections.
Is there a way to do this? The reason for this is that I believe that my
adjfreq
On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 15:39 -0800, Gary E. Miller wrote:
Yo Matthew!
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 21:16:21 +
Vick, Matthew matthew.v...@intel.com wrote:
One other tidbit is that I210 supports EEE, which can affect jitter,
although I wouldn't expect it on that level. You can try turning this
Hey,
-Original Message-
From: Gary E. Miller [mailto:g...@rellim.com]
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 6:49 PM
To: Keller, Jacob E
Cc: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] ntp SHMs
Yo Jacob!
Just to summarize what I just tried, that failed. I
[mailto:g...@rellim.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 2:13 PM
To: Keller, Jacob E
Cc: Jiri Benc; linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] ntp SHMs
Yo Jacob E!
On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 21:33:49 +
Keller, Jacob E jacob.e.kel...@intel.com wrote:
No, I am
-Original Message-
From: Gary E. Miller [mailto:g...@rellim.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 2:55 PM
To: Keller, Jacob E
Cc: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] ntp SHMs
Yo Jacob E!
On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 22:32:40 +
Keller, Jacob E
Hi,
-Original Message-
From: Gary E. Miller [mailto:g...@rellim.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 2:25 PM
To: Keller, Jacob E
Cc: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] ntp SHMs
Yo Jacob E!
On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 21:41:52 +
Keller, Jacob E
Hi,
On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 16:48 -0800, Gary E. Miller wrote:
Yo Jacob E!
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 00:32:27 +
Keller, Jacob E jacob.e.kel...@intel.com wrote:
Yea, in general all you really want is HWTSTAMP_FILTER_ALL, it's a
much better implementation.
So what is the minimmum
Hi,
On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 13:48 -0800, Gary E. Miller wrote:
Yo Jacob E!
On Mon, 23 Feb 2015 21:09:01 +
Keller, Jacob E jacob.e.kel...@intel.com wrote:
Ouch... But I guess pure theory until a WiFi driver has real
support.
NTP and PTP are generally considered solutions
On Tue, 2015-02-17 at 20:25 +0100, Richard Cochran wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:31:44PM +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
The delay message doesn't have to be delayed for the sample to have a
smaller weight. The delay calculated from the four timestamps will be
larger than the average
On Mon, 2015-01-19 at 20:15 +0100, Richard Cochran wrote:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 06:05:07PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
On Thu, 2015-01-15 at 12:42 +0100, Richard Cochran wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 10:03:42PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
What about section settings for things
On Sun, 2015-01-11 at 12:06 +0100, Richard Cochran wrote:
On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 04:16:32PM -0800, Jacob Keller wrote:
+static const char *all_global_options[] = {
+ delayAsymmetry,
+ logAnnounceInterval,
+ logSyncInterval,
...
+ NULL,
+};
+
+/* used by phc2sys to
Hi,
I would prefer a mode of programmatically obtaining clock data possibly via our
private management bus? This way no string processing would have to be done, as
we could obtain this data in a structured format via the management interface
possibly..
I don’t want to remove labels, as when
-Original Message-
From: Christian Riesch [mailto:christian.rie...@omicron.at]
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 11:37 PM
To: Keller, Jacob E; Richard Cochran; linuxptp-
de...@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: RE: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH RFC V2 0/4] Time stamp asymmetry
correction
-Original Message-
From: Jiri Benc [mailto:jb...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 12:11 AM
To: Delio Brignoli
Cc: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/4] Time stamp asymmetry
correction
On Mon, 8 Dec 2014 14:04:56 +0100,
-Original Message-
From: Richard Cochran [mailto:richardcoch...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 7:54 AM
To: Jiri Benc
Cc: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/4] Time stamp asymmetry
correction
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at
In regards to the comment about whether a negative value should be acceptable,
I think it should not. The reason is because I can't think of any scenario in
which hardware timestamps the packet *before* it arrives... That is, there
should never be a hardware which negative latency as that is
On Sat, 2014-11-01 at 20:00 +0100, Richard Cochran wrote:
Before releasing v1.5, I wanted to test phc2sys's new automatic mode
in order to run a BC using a bunch of PCIe cards, but I found it did
not quite work. First of all, the port logic bails out when the PHC
device don't match, and
On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 19:23 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
Jacob,
I tried this program out, and ...
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 03:49:30PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
+.BI caps
+Display the device capabiltiies. This is the default command if no
commands are
+provided.
With no command,
On Thu, 2014-07-10 at 11:35 +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 06:55:23PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
On Wed, 2014-07-09 at 10:21 +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
I'm not sure I understand your question. Would you prefer to export
the running variable and use
On Wed, 2014-07-09 at 06:51 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
The man page has an issue...
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 02:19:34PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
+.TP
+.BI cmp
+Compare the PHC clock device to CLOCK_REALTIME, using the best method
available.
+.TP caps
+Display the device
On Tue, 2014-07-08 at 16:14 +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
The first patch allows using phc2sys with non-default server UDS path.
The next three patches add signal handling to pmc/phc2sys and remove
the UDS socket before exit. The last patch appends the process ID to
the local UDS path so each
On Thu, 2014-06-19 at 09:23 +0100, Andrei Perietanu wrote:
now, when this happened, I noticed my system clock went rogue - for
some
reason it thinks it's July 11th 12:00 am (it's configured toget time
automatically from the internet)
That is strange. You must be sure to turn off NTP
On Thu, 2014-06-19 at 16:18 +0200, Jiri Benc wrote:
On Thu, 3 Apr 2014 11:53:40 +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
As a future improvement, I think it would be nice if ptp4l sent a
notification when exiting so phc2sys could stop its synchronization
and wait until ptp4l is running again.
I
On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 16:45 +0100, Andrei Perietanu wrote:
anyway running the command with -l7 option *sudo ptp4l -i eth1 -l7
-f /etc/ptp4l.conf -m -q*
I get:
ptp4l[535940.417]: selected /dev/ptp1 as PTP clock
ptp4l[535940.417]: PI servo: sync interval 1.000 kp 0.700 ki 0.30
On Sat, 2014-06-07 at 17:39 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 06:29:56PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
Hi Richard (and anyone else who might care),
I have thinking it might be worth adding an extra (optional) operation
for ptp devices which allows querying the current
Hi Richard (and anyone else who might care),
I have thinking it might be worth adding an extra (optional) operation
for ptp devices which allows querying the current adjusted frequency
value. This could be useful for debugging purposes, since there is no
way today to obtain this information from
On Tue, 2014-06-03 at 09:26 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 08:59:27PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
Too long of a line? I usually try to follow the Linux practice which
allows long lines if they only contain print statement, so that it's
easier to grep the source
Hi,
Regarding changes to the ptp4l protocol stack, you would have to change
this if you changed the API in any way, there would need to be
modifications to the ptp4l end.
I think someone from Redhat may be able to answer your question about
the backport of the PHC subsystem better.
You might
On Tue, 2014-06-03 at 14:03 -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
This patch modifies the hwtstamp_ctl program, so that it will (attempt
to) use the SIOCGHWTSTAMP ioctl to non-destructively read the current
hardware timestamping policy, prior to setting it with SIOCSHWTSTAMP.
This change has 3 primary
Hooray! I was always annoyed by this output.
Thanks Miroslav,
Jake
On Wed, 2014-01-08 at 14:23 +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
Negative path delay measurements are expected with E2E, the user doesn't
need to know when that happens.
Signed-off-by: Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com
---
On Sat, 2013-12-07 at 08:13 +0100, Richard Cochran wrote:
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 05:11:48PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
What do you think about having an extended message which indicates I am
ready to receive.. then once ptp4l gets this, it then starts pushing a
set of notifications
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 18:40 +0100, Richard Cochran wrote:
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 09:33:21PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
I like this idea. I also think if we supported the push updates from
ptp4l, where ptp4l sends data over the management interface it would
enable the phc2sys to update
201 - 264 of 264 matches
Mail list logo
