On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 8:09 AM Andriy Kohut <andr...@mellanox.com> wrote: > The main goal of this series it to have one L3 VLAN interface and multiple L2 > ports in the VLAN (we have tested this on the switch with 64 ports).
OK, thanks for the more detailed overview. It seems like it would be useful for ptp4l to support this large-network use case. > We thought about using Linux namespaces also, but PTP4L does not support them. > Our solution was much easier to implement. I see, maybe the biggest problem with namespaces for ptp4l is its main poll loop(), which could only wait for events on a single namespace. Would it be too complicated to run a separate ptp4l per-interface? Each instance of ptp4l would run in its own network namespace (such as via "ip netns"). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
