On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 03:06:11PM +0400, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote: > > As I see this technology requires special dedicated server in the local > network, thus it's unusable in most situations. But it starts working > without any actions from the user (please fix me if I'm wrong).
Perhaps you don't have a very clear picture of how this PTP stuff works. Even when the PHC and time stamping code is compiled in, it does *not* start working unless the end user turns it on, via the SIOCSHWTSTAMP and SO_TIMESTAMPING options. See: Documentation/networking/timestamping.txt Documentation/ptp/ptp.txt > Thus this code enables some rarely used parts of hardware. > After seeing several weird bugs in ethernet devices I prefer to > keep unused/unwanted features off. Just compiling drivers into kernel does not really change the behavior of the hardware. The only drawback I know of is that it adds (minimal) overhead into the packet processing paths, but that is a software issue. I don't mean to start a big discussion here. The question of whether to have PHC support a compile time option should be discussed on the netdev list (added on CC just in case). Thanks, Richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/