> On 15 Mar 2023, at 01:55, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>
> What will happen if the bridge floods the frame to 2 bridge ports, and
> both supports hardware TX timestamping? How many TX timestamps will be
> collected by the kernel, and more importantly, which ones? How many of
> those will be
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 12:25:18PM -0700, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 12:38:06PM +0200, Kamil Zaripov wrote:
> > Can you explain the problems you see with timestamping in the interface on
> > top of a bridge?
>
> When a MAC joins a bridge, the MAC is no longer avaiable as a
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 12:38:06PM +0200, Kamil Zaripov wrote:
> > On 13 Mar 2023, at 20:35, Richard Cochran wrote:
> >
> > "It works for me" is not a strong argument. This software stack must
> > work for everyone.
>
> I agree that “It works for me” is not enough to merge this patch.
>
> >
On Tue, 14 Mar 2023 at 20:27, Richard Cochran
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 12:38:06PM +0200, Kamil Zaripov wrote:
> > Can you explain the problems you see with timestamping in the interface
> on top of a bridge?
>
> When a MAC joins a bridge, the MAC is no longer avaiable as a network
>
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 12:38:06PM +0200, Kamil Zaripov wrote:
> Can you explain the problems you see with timestamping in the interface on
> top of a bridge?
When a MAC joins a bridge, the MAC is no longer avaiable as a network
interface. This is how the bridge thing is implemented in Linux.
> On 13 Mar 2023, at 20:35, Richard Cochran wrote:
>
> "It works for me" is not a strong argument. This software stack must
> work for everyone.
>
I agree that “It works for me” is not enough to merge this patch.
> Time stamping on top of a bridge interface won't
> fly in general, if I'm
On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 12:12, Kamil Zaripov wrote:
>
>
> On 12 Mar 2023, at 14:18, Erez wrote:
>
> Sounds cool, but requires multiple clocks on the network interface.
> Hardware or logic using a single hardware clock.
> I do know that some do work on this.
> Both in kernel and on application
On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:25:28PM +0200, Kamil Zaripov wrote:
>
> > On 13 Mar 2023, at 03:56, Richard Cochran wrote:
> >
> > We don't support PTP on top of bridge interfaces, because the kernel
> > does not support that, and it would be difficult to add.
>
> Ok, but actually it is possible
> On 12 Mar 2023, at 14:18, Erez wrote:
>
> Sounds cool, but requires multiple clocks on the network interface.
> Hardware or logic using a single hardware clock.
> I do know that some do work on this.
> Both in kernel and on application level.
>
If we talk about ptp4l I think that two
> On 13 Mar 2023, at 03:56, Richard Cochran wrote:
>
> We don't support PTP on top of bridge interfaces, because the kernel
> does not support that, and it would be difficult to add.
Ok, but actually it is possible to do it using this patch and it works pretty
good in my case (two VLAN’s on
On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 05:31:29PM +0200, Kamil Zaripov wrote:
> However in a bit more complex network configuration when your VLAN
> interface is created on top of bridge that includes “hardware”
We don't support PTP on top of bridge interfaces, because the kernel
does not support that, and it
> Um, unless I'm mistaken, this is unneeded, because you can specify a
> VLAN interface just like a normal interface. In the kernel, the VLAN
> interface stacks on top of the physical one and passes the time
> stamping APIs through.
It seems that it is true if you create VLAN interface on top
On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 01:00:51PM +0200, Zaripov Kamil wrote:
> This patch allows to set interface name in 'iface:bind' format where:
> - 'iface' is network interface that supports PTP
> - 'bind' is network interface to bind socket
> This feature can be useful if you have one physical network
This patch allows to set interface name in 'iface:bind' format where:
- 'iface' is network interface that supports PTP
- 'bind' is network interface to bind socket
This feature can be useful if you have one physical network interface that
serves two or more logical local networks separated with
14 matches
Mail list logo
