From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
To: Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>,
davem@davemloft.net, Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, gospo@redhat.com, sassmann@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [net-next 5/6] ixgbe: add hardware timestamping support
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:56:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111020145637.GC1949@netboy.at.omicron.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+P7+xoP7VE0FEKnLCbzygw499xLr1PFynPn6W0+ud6KwZHgEg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:04:33AM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:44 AM, Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com> wrote:
> > So, is this wrap around due to the fact that you are tied to the
> > system time via time_compare? Or, putting it another way, can't you
> > program the hardware time stamping unit so that the registers have
> > some reasonable resolution (like 64 bits worth of nanoseconds) and
> > just offer RAW timestamps?
>
> The wrap around is due to hardware limitations. The ixgbe devices
> cannot support 64bits worth of nanoseconds and still have the ability
> to adjust the frequency in parts per billion. A larger increment
> increases the resolution available for frequency adjustments, but
> decreases the time it takes for the cycle counter to wrap around.
Oh, well. That stinks.
I think you do want to offer ppb adjustment.
> > I would really like to move away from the timecompare hacks and
> > towards a proper PHC->SYS PPS solution.
> >
>
> I agree that this is the correct approach. The timecompare
> functionality does have issues.
And these cards are highlighting timecompare weaknesses I had not even
thought of.
I expect that if you offer the RAW time stamps, then it should be
possible to have the time stamp values always correct (or nearly so)
even with a changing link speed. If the link speed change gives an
interrupt, then the ISR can reprogram the frequency compensation
registers and let the counter continue.
> > Again, doing the update thing on every packet won't work for real
> > world PTP scenarios.
> >
> Which is why the PHC solution is better. Work on implementing this
> support is in progress. Out of curiosity, what is the sync rate for
> the scenario that breaks this? I would like to try that rate out on my
> setup.
For the audio/video profile, they have a max of 32 sync packets per
second. Not sure about delay request rate, maybe 16 per second.
Thanks,
Richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-20 14:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-17 12:20 [net-next 0/6 v2][pull request] Intel Wired LAN Driver Updates Jeff Kirsher
2011-10-17 12:20 ` [net-next 1/6] igbvf: Fix trunk vlan Jeff Kirsher
2011-10-17 12:20 ` [net-next 2/6 v2] igb: Check if subordinate VFs are assigned to virtual machines Jeff Kirsher
2011-10-17 15:53 ` Joe Perches
2011-10-17 12:20 ` [net-next 3/6] ixgbe: fix endianess when writing driver version to firmware Jeff Kirsher
2011-10-17 12:21 ` [net-next 4/6] ixgbe: allow eeprom writes via ethtool Jeff Kirsher
2011-10-17 12:21 ` [net-next 5/6] ixgbe: add hardware timestamping support Jeff Kirsher
2011-10-17 16:44 ` Richard Cochran
2011-10-19 17:04 ` Jacob Keller
2011-10-20 14:56 ` Richard Cochran [this message]
2011-10-20 19:57 ` Keller, Jacob E
2011-10-17 12:21 ` [net-next 6/6] ixgbe: change the eeprom version reported by ethtool Jeff Kirsher
2011-10-17 15:57 ` Joe Perches
2011-10-17 17:16 ` Ben Hutchings
2011-10-17 18:02 ` Tantilov, Emil S
2011-10-17 22:49 ` [net-next 0/6 v2][pull request] Intel Wired LAN Driver Updates David Miller
2011-10-17 22:53 ` Jeff Kirsher
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-10-17 11:32 [net-next 0/6][pull " Jeff Kirsher
2011-10-17 11:32 ` [net-next 5/6] ixgbe: add hardware timestamping support Jeff Kirsher
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20111020145637.GC1949@netboy.at.omicron.at \
--to=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gospo@redhat.com \
--cc=jacob.e.keller@intel.com \
--cc=jacob.keller@gmail.com \
--cc=jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sassmann@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.