From: Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev>
To: Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org
Cc: anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com, przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com,
davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,
pabeni@redhat.com, richardcochran@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 0/2] ptp: add control over HW timestamp latch point
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 11:30:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8899c12f-bc2f-49d3-bded-e838ac18fef8@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241028204755.1514189-1-arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>
On 28/10/2024 20:47, Arkadiusz Kubalewski wrote:
> HW support of PTP/timesync solutions in network PHY chips can be
> achieved with two different approaches, the timestamp maybe latched
> either in the beginning or after the Start of Frame Delimiter (SFD) [1].
>
> Allow ptp device drivers to provide user with control over the timestamp
> latch point.
>
> [1] https://www.ieee802.org/3/cx/public/april20/tse_3cx_01_0420.pdf
I just wonder should we add ethtool interface to control this feature.
As we are adding it for phy devices, it's good idea to have a way to
control it through eth device too. WDYT?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev>
To: Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org
Cc: anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com, przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com,
davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,
pabeni@redhat.com, richardcochran@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/2] ptp: add control over HW timestamp latch point
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 11:30:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8899c12f-bc2f-49d3-bded-e838ac18fef8@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241028204755.1514189-1-arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>
On 28/10/2024 20:47, Arkadiusz Kubalewski wrote:
> HW support of PTP/timesync solutions in network PHY chips can be
> achieved with two different approaches, the timestamp maybe latched
> either in the beginning or after the Start of Frame Delimiter (SFD) [1].
>
> Allow ptp device drivers to provide user with control over the timestamp
> latch point.
>
> [1] https://www.ieee802.org/3/cx/public/april20/tse_3cx_01_0420.pdf
I just wonder should we add ethtool interface to control this feature.
As we are adding it for phy devices, it's good idea to have a way to
control it through eth device too. WDYT?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-29 11:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-28 20:47 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 0/2] ptp: add control over HW timestamp latch point Arkadiusz Kubalewski
2024-10-28 20:47 ` Arkadiusz Kubalewski
2024-10-28 20:47 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 1/2] " Arkadiusz Kubalewski
2024-10-28 20:47 ` Arkadiusz Kubalewski
2024-10-29 8:24 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Przemek Kitszel
2024-10-29 8:24 ` Przemek Kitszel
2024-11-06 1:15 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kubalewski, Arkadiusz
2024-11-06 1:15 ` Kubalewski, Arkadiusz
2024-10-28 20:47 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] ice: " Arkadiusz Kubalewski
2024-10-28 20:47 ` Arkadiusz Kubalewski
2024-10-29 8:21 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Przemek Kitszel
2024-10-29 8:21 ` Przemek Kitszel
2024-11-06 1:17 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kubalewski, Arkadiusz
2024-11-06 1:17 ` Kubalewski, Arkadiusz
2024-10-29 11:30 ` Vadim Fedorenko [this message]
2024-10-29 11:30 ` [PATCH net-next v2 0/2] " Vadim Fedorenko
2024-10-29 15:56 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kubalewski, Arkadiusz
2024-10-29 15:56 ` Kubalewski, Arkadiusz
2024-10-29 16:17 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Vadim Fedorenko
2024-10-29 16:17 ` Vadim Fedorenko
2024-11-06 1:15 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kubalewski, Arkadiusz
2024-11-06 1:15 ` Kubalewski, Arkadiusz
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=8899c12f-bc2f-49d3-bded-e838ac18fef8@linux.dev \
--to=vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev \
--cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com \
--cc=arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.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.