[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1253468893.2654.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 10:48:13 -0700
From: Peter P Waskiewicz Jr <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>
To: Christopher Zimmermann <madroach@...web.de>
Cc: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: SO_TIMESTAMPING fix and design decisions
On Sun, 2009-09-20 at 00:52 -0700, Christopher Zimmermann wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:09:21 -0700
> Peter P Waskiewicz Jr <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com> wrote:
>
> > > hardware timestamps only work for the Intel igb driver. I have
> > > access to two test machines with NICs supported by this driver.
> >
> > Intel's 82599, supported by ixgbe, also has the same IEEE 1588
> > timestamping support in hardware. We haven't implemented the support
> > yet in ixgbe, but the hardware is there and does work. If you were
> > curious of the interface, the datasheet for the hardware is available on
> > our SourceForge site (e1000.sf.net).
>
> hi! thanks for the reply.
>
> I already got the documentation for the 82576 cards I have access to. I
> won't be able to afford another pair.
>
> What do you think about my idea to expose the relevant registers to
> userspace? I believe it would not be too difficult for userspace to
> configure the timestamps this way and would allow way more flexibility.
> Of course I would #DEFINE the constants used to set the registers.
The patch seems reasonable, but I haven't played with the igb
timestamping very much. However, what impact will this have on the
existing ptpd userspace daemon?
-PJ
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists