Hi
Thank you for the advice, however it seems that this feature doesn’t supported
by my driver and/or kernel:
$ sudo ip link property add dev eth1 altname eth1a
RTNETLINK answers: Operation not supported
But I’ve patched linuxptp itself so I can append suffix to the interface in
config and remove this suffix when working with sockets. So far so good, it
seems that problem solved.
Regards,
Zaripov Kamil
> On 7 Mar 2023, at 17:28, Richard Cochran <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 12:41:52PM +0200, Kamil Zaripov wrote:
>
>> I have a setup where master running on host with Intel I210 network
>> card and several slaves. Among them some can send PTP messages only
>> over UDP and some of them only over Ethernet. So I’m using two ptp4l
>> presses. One of them called with -2 command line argument and
>> another one with -4 and both of them use same port passed with -I
>> argument. Though I210 network card cannot concurrently timestamp two
>> packages.
>>
>> This lead to the race - if both of ptp4l processes will send Sync
>> messages at the same time with hw tx timestamp request to gib driver
>> only one of them will get timestamp and another one will timeout
>> waiting for the timestamp.
>>
>> Is it possible to sync ptp4l processes so they will not send Sync
>> messages simultaneously?
>
> No, but why not run one process configured with two interfaces?
>
> For example:
>
> ip link property add dev eth1 altname eth1a
>
> Then make a config. file:
>
> [eth1]
> network_transport UDPv4
> [eth1a]
> network_transport L2
>
> I think that should work for your use case.
>
> HTH,
> Richard
>
_______________________________________________
Linuxptp-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-users
