> -Original Message-
> From: Hal Murray
> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2021 8:48 PM
> To: Keller, Jacob E
> Cc: Richard Cochran ; linuxptp-
> de...@lists.sourceforge.net; Hal Murray
> Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] tx_timestamp_timeout default
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Cochran
> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2021 6:36 PM
> To: Keller, Jacob E
> Cc: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] tx_timestamp_timeout default
>
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 11:46:16PM +000
jacob.e.kel...@intel.com said:
> We get into the kthread function within a few hundred usec or less, and then
> the firmware read takes a long time, sometimes over 2 milliseconds.
Why is it taking so long?
How long does it take when things go well? Is there anything complicated
going on with a
On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 11:46:16PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> Either way, I found that whether I used a kthread or not I was
> unable to avoid the timeout issue with ice hardware because the
> delay is caused by the method we must use to access the Tx
> timestamps :( We get into the kthread f
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Cochran
> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2021 4:29 PM
> To: Keller, Jacob E
> Cc: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] tx_timestamp_timeout default
>
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 10:22:59PM +000
On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 10:22:59PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> I am wondering if there would be support for either (a) increasing
> the default timeout, or (b) adding something to the PTP get
> capabilities for indicating a sort of default timeout for the
> device, and if it's not set in the co
