Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/6] ptp: Support hardware clocks with additional free running time
From: Miroslav Lichvar <hidden>
Date: 2022-03-07 14:24:14
From: Miroslav Lichvar <hidden>
Date: 2022-03-07 14:24:14
On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 06:05:31AM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote:
On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 01:07:51PM +0100, Michael Walle wrote:quoted
Richard Cochran wrote:quoted
You are adding eight bytes per frame for what is arguably an extreme niche case.I don't think it is a niche case, btw. I was always wondering why NXP introduced the vclock thingy. And apparently it is for
...
Niche is relative. Believe it or not, the overwhelmingly great majority of people using Linux have no interest in TSN.
Is this not the same issue as what was recently discussed about some devices being able to provide two (e.g. PHY+MAC) or even more timestamps at the same time? There is a need to have multiple PHCs per device and for that to work the drivers need to be able to save multiple timestamps per packet. In this series it is an additional freerunning clock. That seems too specific. I think we need a more general approach that will support two and more physical PHCs per device. Virtual clocks are not involved here. -- Miroslav Lichvar