Re: [Linuxptp-users] ts2phc: Leap second file

2023-11-20 Thread George Hansel
IERS is the leap second authority: https://hpiers.obspm.fr/iers/bul/bulc/ntp/leap-seconds.list On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 9:34 PM ramesh t via Linuxptp-users < linuxptp-users@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > hello, > > Do we have latest leapsecond file available for use? Current one is > expiring on

[Linuxptp-users] ts2phc: Leap second file

2023-11-20 Thread ramesh t via Linuxptp-users
hello, Do we have latest leapsecond file available for use? Current one is expiring on December 28th 2023. https://www.ietf.org/timezones/data/leap-seconds.list (not working) https://data.iana.org/time-zones/tzdb/leapseconds (File expires on:  28 December 2023) Please suggest. regards,

Re: [Linuxptp-users] LinuxPTP Software Timestamping only - PHC Concept

2023-11-20 Thread Richard Cochran
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 12:54:03PM -0500, Jean-Sebastien Stoezel wrote: > When it comes to software timestamping, what is the PHC equivalent on the > device? Is it a hardware timer? Or is it purely software? ethtool is > reporting no PHC, and so I'd assume the PHC is some sort of software timer >

[Linuxptp-users] LinuxPTP Software Timestamping only - PHC Concept

2023-11-20 Thread Jean-Sebastien Stoezel
Hello, I am running linuxPTP 1.8 on a 4.14.0-xilinx device. This device only has software timestamping made available. *root@Megalive:~# ethtool -T eth0Time stamping parameters for eth0:Capabilities:software-transmit (SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_SOFTWARE)software-receive

Re: [Linuxptp-users] How to use common (v)clock for physically different PHCs?

2023-11-20 Thread Osterried Markus (ETAS-DAP/XPC-Fe3) via Linuxptp-users
Hi Vladimir, I had a look at the clock distribution internal and external of SoC, as far as understood, both PHCs use clocks which are phase locked to each other. Also run a test for several days, repeatedly sampled the PHCs and it shows they are in sync, without the need to re-sync. In

Re: [Linuxptp-users] Configuration for boundary clock with on two-port NIC

2023-11-20 Thread Andre Puschmann
Hi, I've tried three different ConnectX-3 NICs now and they all behave the same. To rule out any issues with the GM I tried a Intel i210 as well and that is spot on with excellent sync. However, the Mellanox is not. It's almost as if there is a frequency correction happening inside the NIC

Re: [Linuxptp-users] Configuration for boundary clock with on two-port NIC

2023-11-20 Thread Andre Puschmann
Hey, > How the GM side is configured? Are you writing system time to PHC > every second? If so, you can try make the phc free run. Without 1PPS > signal connecting to the phc or PTM enabled, it's not recommended to > set pmc's time by software, the jitter is quite big. I am not writing any time

Re: [Linuxptp-users] Configuration for boundary clock with on two-port NIC

2023-11-20 Thread Andre Puschmann
Hi, this morning I tried with the Mellanox OFED drivers v4.9-7.1.0 on Ubuntu 20.04 LTS. This was the last version I could get the Mellanox drivers compiled. Result, however, is the same: ptp4l[283.357]: selected /dev/ptp0 as PTP clock ptp4l[283.408]: port 1 (enp1s0): INITIALIZING to

Re: [Linuxptp-users] Configuration for boundary clock with on two-port NIC

2023-11-20 Thread egg car
Hi, How the GM side is configured? Are you writing system time to PHC every second? If so, you can try make the phc free run. Without 1PPS signal connecting to the phc or PTM enabled, it's not recommended to set pmc's time by software, the jitter is quite big. Is the GM and the client connected

Re: [Linuxptp-users] Configuration for boundary clock with on two-port NIC

2023-11-20 Thread Miroslav Lichvar
On Sun, Nov 19, 2023 at 10:07:50PM +0100, Andre Puschmann wrote: > Hey, > > I've been able to get my hands on a ConnectX-3 Pro card and have done some > initial testing. The card indeed has a shared PHC for both ports so running > ptp4l as BC or TC does indeed work without the jbod option. > >