[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZFxOZM9saCVDNIqD@hoboy.vegasvil.org>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2023 19:09:40 -0700
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To: Rahul Rameshbabu <rrameshbabu@...dia.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>,
Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/9] ptp: Clarify ptp_clock_info .adjphase
expects an internal servo to be used
On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 01:52:58PM -0700, Rahul Rameshbabu wrote:
> +PTP hardware clock requirements for '.adjphase'
> +-----------------------------------------------
> +
> + The 'struct ptp_clock_info' interface has a '.adjphase' function.
> + This function has a set of requirements from the PHC in order to be
> + implemented.
> +
> + * The PHC implements a servo algorithm internally that is used to
> + correct the offset passed in the '.adjphase' call.
> + * When other PTP adjustment functions are called, the PHC servo
> + algorithm is disabled,
I disagree with this part:
> and the frequency prior to the '.adjphase'
> + call is restored internally in the PHC.
That seems like an arbitrary rule that doesn't make much sense.
Thanks,
Richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists