Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [v2] msg: bump to IEEE 1588-2019 version
> -Original Message- > From: Richard Cochran > Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 10:58 PM > To: Y.b. Lu > Cc: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Miroslav Lichvar > > Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [v2] msg: bump to IEEE 1588-2019 version > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 02:42:40AM +, Y.b. Lu wrote: > > My fault. I Just forgot the message printed. How about, > > > > versionNumber 2 > > minorVersionNumber 1 > > > > This may match field definition in standard. Considering it's only message > printed, I think either is ok. > > What do you think? > > I prefer keeping the same number of lines and words in the ascii > output, like this: > > versionNumber 2 (older pmc) > versionNumber 2.1 (new pmc) > > Why? > > Because that makes life easier for people who have scripts that parse > the ascii output. The needed changes are smaller. Thank you very much. Sent v3. > > Thanks, > Richard ___ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [v2] msg: bump to IEEE 1588-2019 version
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 02:42:40AM +, Y.b. Lu wrote: > My fault. I Just forgot the message printed. How about, > > versionNumber 2 > minorVersionNumber 1 > > This may match field definition in standard. Considering it's only message > printed, I think either is ok. > What do you think? I prefer keeping the same number of lines and words in the ascii output, like this: versionNumber 2 (older pmc) versionNumber 2.1 (new pmc) Why? Because that makes life easier for people who have scripts that parse the ascii output. The needed changes are smaller. Thanks, Richard ___ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [v2] msg: bump to IEEE 1588-2019 version
> -Original Message- > From: Richard Cochran > Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 1:09 AM > To: Y.b. Lu > Cc: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Miroslav Lichvar > > Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [v2] msg: bump to IEEE 1588-2019 version > > On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 03:20:41PM +0800, Yangbo Lu wrote: > > IEEE 1588-2019 specified new UInteger4 type minorVersionPTP field > > in header, and minorVersionNumber data in portDS. It has the value > > 1 for IEEE 1588-2019, and has the value 0 for IEEE 1588-2008. > > > > This patch is to bump to IEEE 1588-2019 version directly in message, > > considering v2.1 and even future v2.x are all backward compatible. > > > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu > > --- > > Changes for v2: > > - Made v2.1 as macros. > > I really like this change. It is short and sweet. > > However, now the test suite fails on 20-pmc. > > checking pmc output:BAD > sending: GET PORT_DATA_SET > 123456.fffe.780102-1 seq 0 RESPONSE MANAGEMENT > PORT_DATA_SET > portIdentity123456.fffe.780102-1 > portState SLAVE > logMinDelayReqInterval 0 > peerMeanPathDelay 0 > logAnnounceInterval 1 > announceReceiptTimeout 3 > logSyncInterval 0 > delayMechanism 1 > logMinPdelayReqInterval 0 > versionNumber 18 > > I think we should have pmc print versionNumber 2.1 here (format %u.%u) > and then ask Miroslav to adapt the test suite... My fault. I Just forgot the message printed. How about, versionNumber 2 minorVersionNumber 1 This may match field definition in standard. Considering it's only message printed, I think either is ok. What do you think? Thanks. > > Miroslav, I'm thinking the way to handle this in the test suite is to > accept both versionNumber 2 and versionNumber 2.1. > > Thoughts? > > Thanks, > Richard ___ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [v2] msg: bump to IEEE 1588-2019 version
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 09:09:23AM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote: > I think we should have pmc print versionNumber 2.1 here (format %u.%u) > and then ask Miroslav to adapt the test suite... > > Miroslav, I'm thinking the way to handle this in the test suite is to > accept both versionNumber 2 and versionNumber 2.1. Works for me. The test is using regexps, so easy to match multiple strings. There are already some instances of that. I'll update it. -- Miroslav Lichvar ___ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [v2] msg: bump to IEEE 1588-2019 version
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 03:20:41PM +0800, Yangbo Lu wrote: > IEEE 1588-2019 specified new UInteger4 type minorVersionPTP field > in header, and minorVersionNumber data in portDS. It has the value > 1 for IEEE 1588-2019, and has the value 0 for IEEE 1588-2008. > > This patch is to bump to IEEE 1588-2019 version directly in message, > considering v2.1 and even future v2.x are all backward compatible. > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu > --- > Changes for v2: > - Made v2.1 as macros. I really like this change. It is short and sweet. However, now the test suite fails on 20-pmc. checking pmc output:BAD sending: GET PORT_DATA_SET 123456.fffe.780102-1 seq 0 RESPONSE MANAGEMENT PORT_DATA_SET portIdentity123456.fffe.780102-1 portState SLAVE logMinDelayReqInterval 0 peerMeanPathDelay 0 logAnnounceInterval 1 announceReceiptTimeout 3 logSyncInterval 0 delayMechanism 1 logMinPdelayReqInterval 0 versionNumber 18 I think we should have pmc print versionNumber 2.1 here (format %u.%u) and then ask Miroslav to adapt the test suite... Miroslav, I'm thinking the way to handle this in the test suite is to accept both versionNumber 2 and versionNumber 2.1. Thoughts? Thanks, Richard ___ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
[Linuxptp-devel] [v2] msg: bump to IEEE 1588-2019 version
IEEE 1588-2019 specified new UInteger4 type minorVersionPTP field
in header, and minorVersionNumber data in portDS. It has the value
1 for IEEE 1588-2019, and has the value 0 for IEEE 1588-2008.
This patch is to bump to IEEE 1588-2019 version directly in message,
considering v2.1 and even future v2.x are all backward compatible.
Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu
---
Changes for v2:
- Made v2.1 as macros.
---
msg.c | 5 +
msg.h | 9 +++--
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/msg.c b/msg.c
index d1619d4..c4516ad 100644
--- a/msg.c
+++ b/msg.c
@@ -27,9 +27,6 @@
#include "print.h"
#include "tlv.h"
-#define VERSION_MASK 0x0f
-#define VERSION 0x02
-
int assume_two_step = 0;
/*
@@ -80,7 +77,7 @@ static void announce_post_recv(struct announce_msg *m)
static int hdr_post_recv(struct ptp_header *m)
{
- if ((m->ver & VERSION_MASK) != VERSION)
+ if ((m->ver & MAJOR_VERSION_MASK) != PTP_MAJOR_VERSION)
return -EPROTO;
m->messageLength = ntohs(m->messageLength);
m->correction = net2host64(m->correction);
diff --git a/msg.h b/msg.h
index a71df16..b7423ee 100644
--- a/msg.h
+++ b/msg.h
@@ -30,7 +30,12 @@
#include "tlv.h"
#include "tmv.h"
-#define PTP_VERSION 2
+/* Version definition for IEEE 1588-2019 */
+#define PTP_MAJOR_VERSION 2
+#define PTP_MINOR_VERSION 1
+#define PTP_VERSION(PTP_MINOR_VERSION << 4 | PTP_MAJOR_VERSION)
+
+#define MAJOR_VERSION_MASK 0x0f
/* Values for the messageType field */
#define SYNC 0x0
@@ -89,7 +94,7 @@ enum controlField {
struct ptp_header {
uint8_t tsmt; /* transportSpecific | messageType */
- uint8_t ver; /* reserved | versionPTP */
+ uint8_t ver; /* minorVersionPTP | versionPTP */
UInteger16 messageLength;
UInteger8 domainNumber;
Octet reserved1;
--
2.25.1
___
Linuxptp-devel mailing list
Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
