On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 06:17:46PM +, Duncan wrote:
> I don't know why you don't implement this,
Why?
Because I don't have unlimited time to work on ptp4l for free.
Thanks,
Rihcard
--
___
Jiri Benc writes:
>
> On Wed, 2 Apr 2014 18:15:27 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> > > +/*
> > > + * Send message to the given address. This is intended for
management
> > > + * messages only, thus goes always to the general port.
> >
> > There are a couple of unicast options for PTP. We should
On Sat, 5 Apr 2014 12:40:20 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> Let us introduce a struct to hold addresses, something like:
>
> struct address {
> uint8_t buf[MAXADDR];
> socklen_t len;
> }
>
> In that way we won't need to add 'addr' and 'len' all over the pla
Arnold,
Can you please post this question once again, but not as a reply to a
different thread?
Also, no top-posting please.
Thanks,
Richard
--
Put Bad Developers to Shame
Dominate Development with Jenkins Continuous In
Dear Richard,
my linux kernel is 3.0, and my phy is DP83640, and my mac is stmmac,
and my cpu is arm， i just cross-compile the linuxptp, and it seems ok, but
when i run it and use hardware timestamp (./ptp4l - H -i eth0 -p
/dev/ptp0) on my system, the kernel crashed.
so, i just see linu
I looked again at the unicast issue, and here is what I found.
* 1588 has a very complex unicast subscription protocol (16.1). This
is similar to what you have in this series, and so if we do it right
then we will have a good basis for adding this later.
* 1588 also allows basically any kind
On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 07:31:12PM +0200, Jiri Benc wrote:
>
> Okay, I can add a couple more parameters to match the "send" callback.
> Not sure it's worth it, though - adding them later, when they are
> actually needed, would be very easy.
Or how about this: Let transport_send accept an optional
On Wed, 2 Apr 2014 18:15:27 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Send message to the given address. This is intended for management
> > + * messages only, thus goes always to the general port.
>
> There are a couple of unicast options for PTP. We should try to make
> this new interface in
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 09:53:20AM +0100, Jiri Benc wrote:
> +/*
> + * Send message to the given address. This is intended for management
> + * messages only, thus goes always to the general port.
There are a couple of unicast options for PTP. We should try to make
this new interface in a way tha
This will be needed for notifications. Only implemented for UDS.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Benc
---
port.c | 14 ++
port.h | 22 ++
transport.c | 17 +
transport.h | 25 +
transpor
10 matches
Mail list logo
