From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62469C2D0E4 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 19:07:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 132F0223B0 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 19:07:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729529AbgKTTH2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Nov 2020 14:07:28 -0500 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:9616 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728671AbgKTTH2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Nov 2020 14:07:28 -0500 IronPort-SDR: 2FrcaxVfZ6PsSf73tCHopWMXDVBEY5emOEHgCDCyglUMSIBJYWsRYtzoH9jpR7lmSQuTpd2cqx FOW1rkYHIVjA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9811"; a="158566084" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,357,1599548400"; d="scan'208";a="158566084" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Nov 2020 11:07:27 -0800 IronPort-SDR: AsRrJPokzC90Pm0ifA4RIAi1RGX7TZd6txpeqY2EQgu+LwCI0I3uPN7WpmslQ6e3Fr6bVt2Mkp 8jPx+q4L59DQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,357,1599548400"; d="scan'208";a="545552447" Received: from deeppate-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO ellie) ([10.212.22.160]) by orsmga005-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Nov 2020 11:07:26 -0800 From: Vinicius Costa Gomes To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: Richard Cochran , Miroslav Lichvar , intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, andre.guedes@intel.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH next-queue v2 3/3] igc: Add support for PTP getcrosststamp() In-Reply-To: <20201118075534.2a5e63c4@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN.hsd1.ca.comcast.net> References: <20201114025704.GA15240@hoboy.vegasvil.org> <874klo7pwp.fsf@intel.com> <20201117014926.GA26272@hoboy.vegasvil.org> <87d00b5uj7.fsf@intel.com> <20201118075534.2a5e63c4@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN.hsd1.ca.comcast.net> Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 11:07:21 -0800 Message-ID: <87361326fq.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org Hi Jakub, Jakub Kicinski writes: > On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 17:21:48 -0800 Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote: >> > Also, what is the point of providing time measurements every 1 >> > millisecond? >> >> I sincerely have no idea. I had no power on how the hardware was >> designed, and how PTM was implemented in HW. > > Is the PTMed latency not dependent on how busy the bus is? > That'd make 1ms more reasonable. At least from the values of the registers I couldn't see any difference if I was fully using the 2.5G ethernet link or not. Cheers, -- Vinicius