HI Richard, thanks for your answer. The failures are part of the test and after the HW restoring I'm pretty sure that the protocol waltzer is running fine. I noticed that the ptp4l shows master offset and delay summaries. In order to have offset and delay values, the Sync/DelayReq/DelayResp should be correctly exchanged, am I right? Another observation is that Killing and restarting again the ptp4l I reach the SLAVE state without servo jump.
Just now I placed the servo_reset() inside handle_state_decision_event() when we have a fresh new best master, after the clock_freq_est_reset() method. Thanks for your help, luigi luigi Il giorno ven 12 mar 2021 alle ore 20:04 Richard Cochran < richardcoch...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 10:03:39AM +0100, luigi.mantell...@gmail.com > wrote: > > > The issue that I'm facing is the following: > > - After a fault, the port lost the SLAVE role (correct) passing to > > MASTER state (cortect) > > - After this transition, and after restoring the working condition I'm > > unable to move from UNCALIBRATED state to SLAVE state. > > The main reason for getting stuck in UNCALIBRATED is that the port is > not able to complete a delay request/response exchange. > > > My suspect is a wrong servo condition and my idea is to add a > > servo_reset() into clock_update_slave() function. > > > > Is it a good idea or a comlete non-sense? > > That doesn't make any sense to me. You need to find the root cause > and fix it. > > HTH, > Richard > > -- *Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini* My Professional Profile <http://www.linkedin.com/in/comio> *"UNIX is very simple, it just needs a genius to understand its simplicity." [cit.]*
_______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
