> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Cochran [mailto:richardcoch...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2018 7:59 AM
> To: Frantisek Rysanek <frantisek.rysa...@post.cz>
> Cc: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] Despite the patch,
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 09:37:59AM +0100, Frantisek Rysanek wrote:
> let me just briefly follow up on the past thread on "TX timestamp
> timeouts". To sum up: on the my part the problem seems gone.
...
> On tuesday I had another chance to try PTP against the TC switch at a
> substation with
Dear gents,
let me just briefly follow up on the past thread on "TX timestamp
timeouts". To sum up: on the my part the problem seems gone.
In the three months that have passed, I've built another computer
with some i210 and i82574 NIC's inside (related to my thread on
precise timestamping when
Dear everyone (Mr. Keller in particular),
in the process of fiddling with an addon i210-T1 received today
(original Intel board SKU) I have discovered minor havoc in my
previously posted data.
Over the past few days/weeks I was delighted at how marvellous the
onboard i219LM was, while in
On 7 Dec 2017 at 21:55, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> > About ethtool stats - I now understand that you mean the output of
> > ethtool -S, namely the lines
> > tx_hwtstamp_timeouts: 0
> > tx_hwtstamp_skipped: 0
> > rx_hwtstamp_cleared: 0
> > This is what they look like now, that the
> -Original Message-
> From: Frantisek Rysanek [mailto:frantisek.rysa...@post.cz]
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2017 12:41 PM
> To: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] Despite the patch, "timed out while polling for
> tx
>
On 7 Dec 2017 at 18:47, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> > => the Intel NIC hardware is possibly sensitive to "irrelevant"
> > contents in the traffic. I can come up with the following candidate
> > culprits/theories:
> > - absence of the VLAN tag
> > - correction values of 10-20 ms
> > - other mcast
> -Original Message-
> From: Frantisek Rysanek [mailto:frantisek.rysa...@post.cz]
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2017 8:28 AM
> To: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] Despite the patch, "timed out while polling for
> tx
>
Note: I'm forwarding this message with PNG attachments removed,
as I got politely and deservedly reminded that big attachments are a
no-no in a mailing list. Here goes the message:
> > The "correction" field inserted by the RuggedCom switch contains
> > values between 10 and 20 million raw
> -Original Message-
> From: Frantisek Rysanek [mailto:frantisek.rysa...@post.cz]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 8:35 AM
> To: linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Linuxptp-devel] Despite the patch, "timed out while polling for
> tx
>
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 01:54:32PM +0100, Frantisek Rysanek wrote:
> I have the privilege to play around with your software, on a
> Skylake-based platform containing an Intel i219LM
> (alongside i210 which seems to give comparably mediocre results).
>
> I also have the privilege to test your
11 matches
Mail list logo
