From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Denny Page Subject: Re: Extending socket timestamping API for NTP Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 10:55:35 -0800 Message-ID: <97185563-83FD-46D6-B8CE-D3F236157D4D@me.com> References: <20170207140144.GA11233@localhost> <20170209080242.GA1698@localhost.localdomain> <20170209110941.GA1449@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Miroslav Lichvar , Richard Cochran , netdev , Jiri Benc , "Keller, Jacob E" , Willem de Bruijn To: sdncurious Return-path: Received: from st11p06im-asmtp001.me.com ([17.172.125.149]:55434 "EHLO st11p06im-asmtp001.me.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751996AbdBJS4Y (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Feb 2017 13:56:24 -0500 Received: from process-dkim-sign-daemon.st11p06im-asmtp001.me.com by st11p06im-asmtp001.me.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.38.0 64bit (built Feb 26 2016)) id <0OL6010009VOC900@st11p06im-asmtp001.me.com> for netdev@vger.kernel.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 18:55:39 +0000 (GMT) In-reply-to: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > On Feb 09, 2017, at 16:33, Denny Page wrote: >=20 >=20 >> On Feb 09, 2017, at 11:42, sdncurious wrote: >>=20 >> I am still at a loss as to why transpose is required in case of HW >> time stamping. If STF is used for both Tx and Rx time stamping the >> timing is absolutely correct. >=20 > Perhaps this will help. The specific transposition is: >=20 > transposed_timestamp_ns =3D timestamp_ns + (frame_len_bits * = 1000000000) / (interface_speed * 1000000) >=20 > The transposition is applied to received timestamps only. Before anyone else asks, yes, I know this can be reduced. :)=