On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 03:29:35PM -0400, Dale Smith wrote: > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Richard Cochran <richardcoch...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:11:25PM -0400, Dale Smith wrote: > > > Isn't this basically the observedParentClockPhaseChangeRate in the parent > > > data set? (but with whacky units) > > > > Hm, I thought that was the observed difference *after* > > adjustment. If you are right, then it should be easy to provide this > > value. > > Good question. I don't know.
> My question above (Should it?) is really: is it worth the hassle of > implementing and > calculating the variance to get the more useful (IMHO) phase change rate? What exactly is the phase change rate supposed to be useful for? If we knew that, perhaps we could figure out what value it should have :). In 7.6.4.4, it's described as a phase change rate (i.e. frequency offset as per 3.1.25) of the parent's clock as measured by the slave clock. But compared to what? To another reference clock, the uncorrected slave clock, or adjusted slave clock (with or without currently running phase correction)? -- Miroslav Lichvar ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data. Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing & Easy Data Exploration http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
