[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230119214516.59adab05@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2023 21:45:16 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Rahul Rameshbabu <rrameshbabu@...dia.com>
Cc: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Vincent Cheng <vincent.cheng.xh@...esas.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next 03/15] net/mlx5: Add adjphase function to support
hardware-only offset control
On Thu, 19 Jan 2023 21:22:00 -0800 Rahul Rameshbabu wrote:
> > Hm, so are you saying that:
> >
> > adjtime(delta):
> > clock += delta
> >
> > but:
> >
> > adjfreq(delta):
>
> Did you mean adjphase here?
Yes, sorry
> > on clock tick & while delta > 0:
> > clock += small_value
> > delta -= small_value
> >
> > because from looking at mlx5 driver code its unclear whether the
> > implementation does a precise but one shot adjustment or gradual
> > adjustments.
>
> The pseudo code your drafted is accurate otherwise. The lack of clarity
> in our driver comes from leaving the responsibility of that smooth
> gradual transition (to keep in sync with the clock frequency while
> running) up to the device.
Ah, I see. That makes sense. This is how system clocks react too
or is it a local PTP invention? I think it may be worth documenting
in ptp_clock_kernel.h, most driver authors may not understand
the difference between adjtime and adjphase :(
Powered by blists - more mailing lists