From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christopher Zimmermann Subject: Re: SO_TIMESTAMPING fix and design decisions Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 20:50:47 +0200 Message-ID: <20090920205047.0f2df70c@pundit> References: <20090919192549.0735c93a@pundit> <1253398161.14869.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090920095242.5cd42f1a@pundit> <1253468893.2654.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/vaGv7=19pSU43GUP8u_JBAi"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" To: netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.10]:61100 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755256AbZITSvf (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Sep 2009 14:51:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1253468893.2654.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --Sig_/vaGv7=19pSU43GUP8u_JBAi Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 10:48:13 -0700 Peter P Waskiewicz Jr wrote: > On Sun, 2009-09-20 at 00:52 -0700, Christopher Zimmermann wrote: > > On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:09:21 -0700 > > Peter P Waskiewicz Jr wrote: > >=20 > > > > hardware timestamps only work for the Intel igb driver. I have=20 > > > > access to two test machines with NICs supported by this driver. > > >=20 > > > Intel's 82599, supported by ixgbe, also has the same IEEE 1588 > > > timestamping support in hardware. We haven't implemented the support > > > yet in ixgbe, but the hardware is there and does work. If you were > > > curious of the interface, the datasheet for the hardware is available= on > > > our SourceForge site (e1000.sf.net). > >=20 > > hi! thanks for the reply. > >=20 > > I already got the documentation for the 82576 cards I have access to. I= =20 > > won't be able to afford another pair. > >=20 > > What do you think about my idea to expose the relevant registers to=20 > > userspace? I believe it would not be too difficult for userspace to=20 > > configure the timestamps this way and would allow way more flexibility.= =20 > > Of course I would #DEFINE the constants used to set the registers. >=20 > The patch seems reasonable, but I haven't played with the igb > timestamping very much. However, what impact will this have on the > existing ptpd userspace daemon? It will need to be modified. If you want to avoid this, one could keep=20 the HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_.... defines and just redifine them to reflect=20 the new interface. Where can I find this ptpd userspace daemon, which supports hardware=20 timestamps using the ioctl interface? ptpd.sourceforge.net doesn't. Cheers, Christopher Zimmermann --Sig_/vaGv7=19pSU43GUP8u_JBAi Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkq2eYcACgkQET+LZnf0EFx7DQCgx2ANFLzepaCcPgql1WEkQmeg 1hwAn3o6fesOkmfktDjBbM/prXQVu+eu =lJjf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/vaGv7=19pSU43GUP8u_JBAi--