[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZXtLvOfS0uYxESQm@hoboy.vegasvil.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2023 10:38:52 -0800
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To: Min Li <lnimi@...mail.com>
Cc: lee@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Min Li <min.li.xe@...esas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] ptp: introduce PTP_CLOCK_EXTOFF event
for the measured external offset
On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 11:36:24AM -0500, Min Li wrote:
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/ptp_clock.h b/include/uapi/linux/ptp_clock.h
> index da700999c..66f4dd73a 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/ptp_clock.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/ptp_clock.h
> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
> #define PTP_RISING_EDGE (1<<1)
> #define PTP_FALLING_EDGE (1<<2)
> #define PTP_STRICT_FLAGS (1<<3)
> +#define PTP_EXT_OFFSET (1<<4)
This isn't going to work.
If user space enables time stamps twice, once with PTP_EXT_OFFSET and
once without, it won't be able to differentiate the two when it reads
a ptp_extts_event.
Thanks,
Richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists