Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/1] Support for Port level Perforamnce Monitoring Counters

2023-11-26 Thread Richard Cochran
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 02:38:19PM +0100, Erez wrote: > I think Richard means using the SUBSCRIBE_EVENTS_NP. Yes. > Adding new events, and make sure the ptp4l sends all the statistics you > need together. Yes, but please don't "overload" the existing counters. Just add new fields with names

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/1] Support for Port level Perforamnce Monitoring Counters

2023-11-13 Thread Erez
I think Richard means using the SUBSCRIBE_EVENTS_NP. Adding new events, and make sure the ptp4l sends all the statistics you need together. Erez On Sat, 11 Nov 2023 at 19:02, Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini < luigi.mantell...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for your time. > > What do you mean with "PUSH"

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/1] Support for Port level Perforamnce Monitoring Counters

2023-11-11 Thread Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini
Thanks for your time. What do you mean with "PUSH" message? I agree with you in order to keep it simple. ciao luigi Il giorno ven 10 nov 2023 alle ore 17:58 Richard Cochran < richardcoch...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 07:58:14AM +0100, Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini wrote: >

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/1] Support for Port level Perforamnce Monitoring Counters

2023-11-10 Thread Richard Cochran
On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 07:58:14AM +0100, Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini wrote: > Using just polling on UDS is a bad idea IMHO because you need to capture at > the exact same time point all counters of all ports spending a lot of > effort and cpu. So make it into a PUSH message. > It's better to have

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/1] Support for Port level Perforamnce Monitoring Counters

2023-11-09 Thread Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini
Sure, the Annex J is silly but the customers ask for it. :( The idea is to keep current and the last snapshot (15m, 1h, 24h) demanding the complete history to the external monitor. Using just polling on UDS is a bad idea IMHO because you need to capture at the exact same time point all counters of

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/1] Support for Port level Perforamnce Monitoring Counters

2023-11-09 Thread Richard Cochran
On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 02:34:54PM +0200, Luigi Mantellini wrote: > Dear All, > > Starting from IEEE 1588-2019 Annex J, I'm trying to introduce a Performace > monitoring Counters. > > The standard asks to keep up 98 records (96 for 15min records and 2 for 24h > records). > > I tried to follow a

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/1] Support for Port level Perforamnce Monitoring Counters

2023-08-18 Thread Erez
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 at 14:36, Luigi Mantellini wrote: > Dear All, > > Starting from IEEE 1588-2019 Annex J, I'm trying to introduce a Performace > monitoring Counters. > > The standard asks to keep up 98 records (96 for 15min records and 2 for 24h > records). > > I tried to follow a more general