[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100923214359.3f287b11@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:43:59 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Rodolfo Giometti <giometti@...ux.it>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] ptp: Added a clock that uses the eTSEC found on the
MPC85xx.
> Please do not introduce useless additional layers for clock sync. Load
> these ptp clocks like the other regular clock modules and make them sync
> system time like any other clock.
I don't think you understand PTP. PTP has masters, a system can need to
be honouring multiple conflicting masters at once.
> Really guys: I want a PTP solution! Now! And not some idiotic additional
> kernel layers that just pass bits around because its so much fun and
> screws up clock accurary in due to the latency noise introduced while
> having so much fun with the bits.
There are some interesting complications in putting a PTP sync
interface in kernel.
--
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