Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH 0/1] Add master only management TLV

2021-04-22 Thread Jacob Keller
On 4/22/2021 8:46 AM, Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini wrote: > Generally speaking and in my opinion should be interesting to have the > following features: >  - asynchronous clock adjust: I2c is a slow bus with unpredictable > access time, especially when you have a lot of devices. this is a true >

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH 0/1] Add master only management TLV

2021-04-22 Thread Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini
Hi Richard, Hi Geva, I already tried "set MasteOnly" patch, except the slaveOnly missing check, and it seems to work. Generally speaking and in my opinion should be interesting to have the following features: - asynchronous clock adjust: I2c is a slow bus with unpredictable access time,

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH 0/1] Add master only management TLV

2021-04-22 Thread Richard Cochran
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 01:35:11PM +, Geva, Erez wrote: > You need to verify the ptp4l can dynamically change the master only flag. +1 > As the 'slave only' flag does not allow set, I skip it for now. Right, and it wouldn't work if added naively. > Only priorities 1 and 2 can be changed

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH 0/1] Add master only management TLV

2021-04-22 Thread Geva, Erez
You may add set action if you wish. You may combine my get master only patch with it. You need to verify the ptp4l can dynamically change the master only flag. As the 'slave only' flag does not allow set, I skip it for now. Only priorities 1 and 2 can be changed at the moment. However as the

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH 0/1] Add master only management TLV

2021-04-22 Thread Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini
Why do you also introduce the set action? This is a snip from port_management_set: static int port_management_set(struct port *target, struct port *ingress, int id, struct ptp_message *req) { ... switch (id) { case TLV_MASTERONLY: mtd =

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] pmc is not giving any output without using -d option

2021-04-22 Thread Geva, Erez
No, You must use a proper domain number that match the PTP domain. You can fetch it from 1. A configuration file with domainNumber 2. The – domainNumber option 3. The -d The default is 0. Erez From: Ruby Bhati Sent: Thursday, 22 April 2021 13:40 To:

[Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH 0/1] Add master only management TLV

2021-04-22 Thread Erez Geva
As we support the new master only flag. Add the master only TLV to pmc tool. Erez Geva (1): Add master only management TLV pmc.c| 5 + pmc_common.c | 2 ++ port.c | 6 ++ tlv.h| 1 + 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+) -- 2.20.1

[Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Add master only management TLV

2021-04-22 Thread Erez Geva
- Add support in the pmc tool - Add the TLV in port module. Signed-off-by: Erez Geva --- pmc.c| 5 + pmc_common.c | 2 ++ port.c | 6 ++ tlv.h| 1 + 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+) diff --git a/pmc.c b/pmc.c index a767c8a..00d6014 100644 --- a/pmc.c +++ b/pmc.c

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] pmc is not giving any output without using -d option

2021-04-22 Thread Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini
[edited] pmc uses the domainNumber = 0 as default and you needn't "-d 0". If you omit the option, the default will be used instead. To use a different domainNumber you have two options: 1) use -d XX 2) specify domainNumber into a configuration file in [global] section. You can use the ptp4l

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] pmc is not giving any output without using -d option

2021-04-22 Thread Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini
pmc use as default the domainNumber = 0, and you needn't "-d 0". If you omit the option, the default will be used istead. To use a different domainNumber you have two options: use -d XX or specify domainNumber into a configuration file. pmc.conf: [global] ... domainNumber 44 # mpc -u -f pmc.conf

[Linuxptp-devel] pmc is not giving any output without using -d option

2021-04-22 Thread Ruby Bhati
Hi I am running ptp4l with G.8275.2 profile. But when i am running pmc without -d option its not showing any output ]# pmc -u -d 0 'GET DOMAIN' sending: GET DOMAIN Its working only when I am running with -d option as # pmc -u -d 0 -d 44 'GET DOMAIN' sending: GET DOMAIN

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH v4] Rework twoStepFlag in order to handle one step on port basis.

2021-04-22 Thread Geva, Erez
On 22/04/2021 09:18, Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini wrote: > With this patch we introduce the twoStepFlag evaluation at port level. > > --- > config.c | 2 +- > port.c | 35 ++- > ptp4l.8 | 9 - > 3 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > >

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH] To support Ordinary Clock-Subordinate/Slave just a bunch of devices(jbod) feature.

2021-04-22 Thread Miroslav Lichvar
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 09:04:28AM +, Amar Subramanyam via Linuxptp-devel wrote: > >But you haven't even identified a problem. clientOnly and > >boundary_clock_jbod work just fine together: > > 1. Using boundary_clock_jbod has few issues which weren’t mentioned > earlier(see mail

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH] To support Ordinary Clock-Subordinate/Slave just a bunch of devices(jbod) feature.

2021-04-22 Thread Amar Subramanyam via Linuxptp-devel
>But you haven't even identified a problem. clientOnly and boundary_clock_jbod >work just fine together: 1. Using boundary_clock_jbod has few issues which weren’t mentioned earlier(see mail trail for the issues). Also boundary_clock_jbod might not be right term to be used for Ordinary

[Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH v4] Rework twoStepFlag in order to handle one step on port basis.

2021-04-22 Thread Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini
With this patch we introduce the twoStepFlag evaluation at port level. --- config.c | 2 +- port.c | 35 ++- ptp4l.8 | 9 - 3 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/config.c b/config.c index 4472d3d..f0e1e07 100644 ---

[Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH v3] RFC: Rework twoStepFlag in order to handle one step on port basis.

2021-04-22 Thread Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini
--- config.c | 2 +- port.c | 40 +++- ptp4l.8 | 9 - 3 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/config.c b/config.c index 4472d3d..f0e1e07 100644 --- a/config.c +++ b/config.c @@ -322,7 +322,7 @@ struct config_item