On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:06:17PM +0000, Keller, Jacob E wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Hal Murray <halmur...@sonic.net> > > Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 4:34 AM > > To: Miroslav Lichvar <mlich...@redhat.com> > > Cc: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com>; linuxptp- > > de...@lists.sourceforge.net; Hal Murray <halmur...@sonic.net> > > Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] [PATCH 2/4] Add sock servo. > > > > > > >> How specific is this to chronyd? > > > AFAIK no other application implements the server side of the protocol. > > >> Would it make sense to call this chronysock > > >> instead of just sock? > > > Yes, that makes sense. If there are no other issues with the patches, I > > > can > > > resend. > > > > Calling it chronysock has the disadvantage of sounding like only chrony > > should > > use it. > > > > Yea, but I feel that just "sock" is vague. I'm not totally opposed to it > though.
What about rcl_sock or refclock_sock? It's used in the file linked by Miroslav. Regards Maciek _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
