[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1342713051.2617.40.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.solarflarecom.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 16:50:51 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To: Stuart Hodgson <smhodgson@...arflare.com>
CC: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com>,
Andrew Jackson <ajackson@...arflare.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/7] sfc: Add support for IEEE-1588 PTP
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 16:29 +0100, Stuart Hodgson wrote:
> On 19/07/12 15:25, Richard Cochran wrote:
[...]
> > I am trying to purge the whole SYS thing (only blackfin is left)
> > because there is a much better way to go about this, namely
> > synchronizing the system time to the PHC time via an internal PPS
> > signal.
>
> This may be possible in future. But leads us to another problem
> where the PPS event that is generated by the PHC subsystem to the
> PPS subsystem is stamped with the current system_time. That may
> be fine for a PPS signal generated from an interrupt but not when
> the internal PPS event has implicit jitter from the handler/event_queue
> that we have in the driver.
[...]
We can certainly take a timestamp in the hard interrupt handler; in fact
that's what I originally expected we would do since we have a separate
MSI-X vector for PTP. But even hard interrupt handling can be subject
to substantial jitter.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
--
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