Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/6] Improve accuracy with software timestamping

2015-03-10 Thread Miroslav Lichvar
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:29:43AM +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > To give you an idea what difference you can expect with raw > delay/offset and weights, here are graphs from a simulation with > 10us jitter and default PI constants with SW timestamping. > > https://mlichvar.fedorapeople.org/tmp/

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH RFC 4/6] clock: set sample weight.

2015-03-10 Thread Miroslav Lichvar
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 08:48:15PM +0100, Richard Cochran wrote: > On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 01:56:16PM +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > > + if (sample_delay > 0 && c->path_delay > 0) { > > + weight = (double)c->path_delay / sample_delay; > > + if (weight

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/6] Improve accuracy with software timestamping

2015-03-10 Thread Miroslav Lichvar
On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 08:36:43PM +0100, Richard Cochran wrote: > The really interesting comparision would be the actual offset after > PI servo control. I am looking to compare the result of your patch > set on a small but real network... Ok. To give you an idea what difference you can expect