Re: [Linuxptp-devel] Is intel i350 ptp driver broken?

Hi, For fixes of Intel drivers in the Linux kernel, you should approach the Intel network group of the Linux kernel. You can look in https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/MAINTAINERS . For "INTEL ETHERNET DRIVERS". Or perhaps they are here in this mailing list.

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] Is intel i350 ptp driver broken?

On 5/26/2023 7:36 AM, egg car wrote: > Dear Richard, > > Ah yes I have figured out that the problem is not ts2phc, it should be > fixed in igb_extts() at igb_main.c > > if (hw->mac .type > == e1000_82580

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] Is intel i350 ptp driver broken?

Dear Richard, Ah yes I have figured out that the problem is not ts2phc, it should be fixed in igb_extts() at igb_main.c if (hw->mac .type == e1000_82580 || >

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] Is intel i350 ptp driver broken?

On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 03:02:43PM +0800, egg car wrote: > It's a bit complicated to use, I see why they use 'struct timecounter' > instead of hardware PHC > counter, and in this case all the timestamp regs cannot be used directly. > Needs more time to find out how to fix this, either the driver

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] Is intel i350 ptp driver broken?

Hello Egg Car, prompted by your discovery, I've tried comparing the datasheets for the 82576, 82580, i350/354 and i210. And after quite a bit of cross-checking between the sparse and "not quite comparable" datasheets, and the driver source code, I have to agree with your conclusion. It is quite

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] Is intel i350 ptp driver broken?

Well I just read the i350 datasheet again and found why the driver was designed so. i350 SYSTIMH has only 8 valid bits, thus the SYSTIM could only count 2^40 ns aka 1099.5s. It's a bit complicated to use, I see why they use 'struct timecounter' instead of hardware PHC counter, and in this case

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] Is intel i350 ptp driver broken?

Hi Frantisek, Thanks for your detailed explanation, that makes things clear. you'll notice that it describes the structure of the SYSTIM registers > in the i82576 vs. the i82580. This seems to be outdated for the > i210/i350, whose SYSTIM registers are "flat": 32bit seconds, 32bit > nanoseconds,

Re: [Linuxptp-devel] Is intel i350 ptp driver broken?

On 25 May 2023 at 17:40, egg car wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm trying to use i350 adapter with a hardware 1pps signal input on a > SDP pin. > > I'm testing on kernel 5.19(i350 hardware ts capture function was > announced to be supported since kernel 5.17), using 'ts2phc' program > could capture