[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <DM6PR11MB465719CBAEDA91D1E6F7960B9B4D2@DM6PR11MB4657.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2024 07:37:01 +0000
From: "Kubalewski, Arkadiusz" <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>
To: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
"Nguyen, Anthony L" <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, "Kitszel, Przemyslaw"
<przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>, "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>, "kuba@...nel.org"
<kuba@...nel.org>, "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>, "Loktionov,
Aleksandr" <aleksandr.loktionov@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 1/2] ptp: add control over HW timestamp latch
point
>From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
>Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2024 4:13 AM
>
>On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 04:19:54PM +0200, Arkadiusz Kubalewski wrote:
>> Currently HW support of PTP/timesync solutions in network PHY chips
>> can be implemented with two different approaches, the timestamp maybe
>> latched either at the beginning or after the Start of Frame Delimiter
>(SFD) [1].
>
>Why did 802.3-2012 change the definition of the time stamp position?
>
>Thanks,
>Richard
Good question!
Although, I don't feel like I a right person to answer this, I believe
This was the other way around and they just tried to react on the PHY
chip vendors inconsistencies.
Thank you!
Arkadiusz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists