From: Christian Riesch <christian.riesch@omicron.at>
To: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
Cc: "\"Sørensen, Stefan\"" <Stefan.Sorensen@spectralink.com>,
"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"mugunthanvnm@ti.com" <mugunthanvnm@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net:cpsw: Pass unhandled ioctl's on to generic phy ioctl
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 12:06:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52F21B35.9000502@omicron.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1391595820.3003.60.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>
On 2014-02-05 11:23, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 08:12 +0100, Richard Cochran wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 09:51:59PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>>
>>> Right. If all versions of CPSW include hardware timestamping then
>>> bother with PHY timestamping at all? And why make CONFIG_TI_CPTS
>>> configurable?
>>
>> On the one hand, PHY time stamping is more accurate and offers
>> synchronization performance that is measurably better than MAC time
>> stamping.
>
> I suppose that depends on how much jitter there is in the PHY?
Not only jitter, asymmetries of the PHY delays must be well known, too,
and these data are not always available from datasheets.
If someone is interested in measurement results: We did a few
experiments last year for 100 Mbit Ethernet and compared MAC
timestamping of a P2020 with the PHY timestamping in the DP83640 (see
Table III in [1]).
Christian
[1] C. Riesch, C. Marinescu, and M. Rudigier, "Measurement of egress and
ingress delays of PTP clocks", in 2013 International IEEE Symposium on
Precision Clock Synchronization for Measurement Control and
Communication (ISPCS), Lemgo, Germany, Sep. 22–27, 2013, pp. 113–118.
http://www.riesch.at/christian/ISPCS2013_Measurement_of_egress_and_ingress_delays_of_PTP_clocks.pdf
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-05 11:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-04 7:50 [PATCH] net:cpsw: Pass unhandled ioctl's on to generic phy ioctl Stefan Sørensen
2014-02-04 10:50 ` Ben Hutchings
2014-02-04 15:08 ` Sørensen, Stefan
2014-02-04 21:51 ` Ben Hutchings
2014-02-05 7:12 ` Richard Cochran
2014-02-05 10:23 ` Ben Hutchings
2014-02-05 11:06 ` Christian Riesch [this message]
2014-02-05 11:26 ` Richard Cochran
2014-02-05 7:28 ` Sørensen, Stefan
2014-02-05 8:18 ` Mugunthan V N
2014-02-05 10:49 ` Christian Riesch
2014-02-05 14:15 ` Mugunthan V N
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=52F21B35.9000502@omicron.at \
--to=christian.riesch@omicron.at \
--cc=Stefan.Sorensen@spectralink.com \
--cc=ben@decadent.org.uk \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=mugunthanvnm@ti.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).