[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191227020820.GA6970@localhost>
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2019 18:08:20 -0800
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To: "Y.b. Lu" <yangbo.lu@....com>
Cc: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: mscc: ocelot: support PPS signal generation
On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 11:17:26AM +0000, Y.b. Lu wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
> > Also, I think what you have implemented here is periodic output
> > (PTP_CLK_REQ_PEROUT) not PPS [input] (PTP_CLK_REQ_PPS). I have found
> > the PTP documentation to be rather confusing on what PTP_CLK_REQ_PPS
> > means, so I'm adding Richard in the hope that he may clarify (also
> > what's different between PTP_CLK_REQ_PPS and PTP_CLK_REQ_PPS).
The PTP_CLK_REQ_PPS is for generating events for the kernel's PPS
subsystem. (See drivers/pps). This has nothing to do with actual PPS
signals.
> My understand is PTP_CLK_REQ_PEROUT is for periodical output,
Yes.
> and PTP_CLK_REQ_PPS is for PPS event handling.
No.
Some cards generate an interrupt at the full second roll over. The
interrupt service routine can feed a system time stamp into the
kernel's pps subsystem for use by NTP.
If your device is generating an actual PPS output signal, then you
should implement the PTP_CLK_REQ_PEROUT method.
Bonus points for making the signal fully programmable!
Thanks,
Richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists