On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 02:19:24PM +0200, Joseph Matan wrote: > Hi, > > I don't have an answer to your question, but I can share from my experience > that I'm familiar with this. I even posted a similar question a year or so > ago. > I also tried to open a ticket in Intel Customer Service but nothing good > came through. > Maybe the e1000e developers community would have an idea (but I didn't try > to ask there). > > My problem with the i219 NIC was that with no traffic the path delay was > around ~7 or 8 usec (as you mentioned), but in intervals of high load of > traffic the path delay decreased significantly to something like 800 nsec > (0.8 usec). > These significant changes in the path delay between 8 usec to 0.8 usec > caused me lots of accurecy troubles... (and I didn't use any switch between > my master and slave). > However, from the tests I was doing, the i210 doesn't suffer from this > behaviour. > Intel Customer Service didn't know to answer if this is a bug or perhaps a > feature that can be switched off/on. > > Hope it helped somehow... > Joseph
Not sure if you've exhausted this option with Intel support, but this sounds like the typical signature of what Energy Efficient Ethernet would do to PTP. _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-users mailing list Linuxptp-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-users
