Hi Richard (and anyone else who might care),
I have thinking it might be worth adding an extra (optional) operation
for ptp devices which allows querying the current adjusted frequency
value. This could be useful for debugging purposes, since there is no
way today to obtain this information from t
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 06:29:56PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> Hi Richard (and anyone else who might care),
>
> I have thinking it might be worth adding an extra (optional) operation
> for ptp devices which allows querying the current adjusted frequency
> value. This could be useful for debugg
On Sat, 2014-06-07 at 17:39 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 06:29:56PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> > Hi Richard (and anyone else who might care),
> >
> > I have thinking it might be worth adding an extra (optional) operation
> > for ptp devices which allows querying the
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 10:10:56PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
>
> Can this be done on the ptp clock device? If so, this would be fine :)
Yes, using the FD_TO_CLOCKID macro.
See phc_open() in phc.c.
Thanks,
Richard
--
On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 06:24 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 10:10:56PM +, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> >
> > Can this be done on the ptp clock device? If so, this would be fine :)
>
> Yes, using the FD_TO_CLOCKID macro.
> See phc_open() in phc.c.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
Ex
Isn't this basically the observedParentClockPhaseChangeRate in the parent
data set? (but with whacky units)
I know linuxptp doesn't implement this, along with
observedParentOffsetScaledLogVariance. Should it?
-Dale
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Keller, Jacob E
wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-06-1
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:11:25PM -0400, Dale Smith wrote:
> Isn't this basically the observedParentClockPhaseChangeRate in the parent
> data set? (but with whacky units)
Hm, I thought that was the observed difference *after*
adjustment. If you are right, then it should be easy to provide this
va
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Richard Cochran
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:11:25PM -0400, Dale Smith wrote:
> > Isn't this basically the observedParentClockPhaseChangeRate in the parent
> > data set? (but with whacky units)
>
> Hm, I thought that was the observed difference *after*
> ad
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 03:29:35PM -0400, Dale Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Richard Cochran
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:11:25PM -0400, Dale Smith wrote:
> > > Isn't this basically the observedParentClockPhaseChangeRate in the parent
> > > data set? (but with whacky u
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Miroslav Lichvar
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 03:29:35PM -0400, Dale Smith wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Richard Cochran <
> richardcoch...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:11:25PM -0400, Dale Smith wrote:
> > > > Isn't this
10 matches
Mail list logo