On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 20:50, Vladimir Oltean [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 20:45, Richard Cochran [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 02:33:52PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:

quoted

In the meantime: Richard, do you have any objections to this patchset?

I like the fact that you didn't have to change the dsa or ptp
frameworks this time around.  I haven't taken a closer look than that
yet.

quoted

I was wondering whether the path delay difference between E2E and P2P
rings any bell to you.

Can it be that the switch applies corrections in HW?

Yes it can be. It was one of the first things I thought of.
Normally it updates the correction field with its own residence time
in 1-step L2 event messages (but I use 2 step).
It also has a bit called IGNORE2STF (ignore 2-step flag) by which it
updates the correction field in all L2 event messages (including sync,
thereby violating the spec for a switch, as far as I'm aware). But I'm
not setting it.
I also looked at egress frames with wireshark and the correction field is zero.

I also changed around the values of ptp_dst_mac and p2p_dst_mac in
linuxptp in the hope that I'd throw off whatever hardware parser it
has to identify the event frames, but I still get negative path delay
with E2E nonetheless. So it's probably not that.

quoted

Thanks,
Richard

Thanks,
-Vladimir

-Vladimir