Thanks for the feedback Richard. On Fri, 2018-08-17 at 23:33 -0400, Richard Cochran wrote: > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 10:42:10AM -0700, Vedang Patel wrote: > > > > > > Changes in V2: > > ~~~~~~~~~~~ > This looks a lot better, thanks! I'll have a few small comments on > the patches... > > > > > Some Opens: > > - Currently, we are using masterOnly (a per-port config option) and > > slaveOnly > > (a global config option) to determine role of the devices. This > > configuration > > option might be a little confusing to a new comer. One idea is to > > change > > slaveOnly to per-port config option. Are there any other ideas > > for this or > > the current way is not as confusing as I think? > Most users only have a single port. Probably automotive will also > mainly be single port devices. Anyone making a BC or TC already has > a > super confusing swamp full of options to wade through. In other > words, I expect such "power users" to know what they are doing. > makes sense. > > > > - In port_p2p_transition(), we are setting up the delay timer when > > BMCA is set > > as ‘noop’. Usually it is initialized then the device transitions > > to > > PS_LISTENING. But, we are skipping the LISTENING state. > These exceptional cases in the series don't seem too bad to me. > > > > > Another alternative > > is to transition to PS_LISTENING and then unconditionally > > transfer to > > PS_MASTER/PS_SLAVE. > What do you mean by "unconditionally"? State transitions are > triggered by events. > Yeah, now that I think of it, I don't think triggering anything unconditionally is going to work.
-Vedang > Thanks, > Richard ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
