linuxptp-users Mailing List for linuxptp (Page 25)
PTP IEEE 1588 stack for Linux
Brought to you by:
rcochran
Menu
▾
▴
linuxptp-users — Open discussion on using the linuxptp software.
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2012 |
Jan
|
Feb
(10) |
Mar
(47) |
Apr
|
May
(26) |
Jun
(10) |
Jul
(4) |
Aug
(2) |
Sep
(2) |
Oct
(20) |
Nov
(14) |
Dec
(8) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 |
Jan
(6) |
Feb
(18) |
Mar
(27) |
Apr
(57) |
May
(32) |
Jun
(21) |
Jul
(79) |
Aug
(108) |
Sep
(13) |
Oct
(73) |
Nov
(51) |
Dec
(24) |
| 2014 |
Jan
(24) |
Feb
(41) |
Mar
(39) |
Apr
(5) |
May
(6) |
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(5) |
Aug
(15) |
Sep
(7) |
Oct
(6) |
Nov
|
Dec
(7) |
| 2015 |
Jan
(27) |
Feb
(18) |
Mar
(37) |
Apr
(8) |
May
(13) |
Jun
(44) |
Jul
(4) |
Aug
(50) |
Sep
(35) |
Oct
(6) |
Nov
(24) |
Dec
(19) |
| 2016 |
Jan
(30) |
Feb
(30) |
Mar
(23) |
Apr
(4) |
May
(12) |
Jun
(19) |
Jul
(26) |
Aug
(13) |
Sep
|
Oct
(23) |
Nov
(37) |
Dec
(15) |
| 2017 |
Jan
(33) |
Feb
(19) |
Mar
(20) |
Apr
(43) |
May
(39) |
Jun
(23) |
Jul
(20) |
Aug
(27) |
Sep
(10) |
Oct
(15) |
Nov
|
Dec
(24) |
| 2018 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
(10) |
Mar
(34) |
Apr
(34) |
May
(28) |
Jun
(50) |
Jul
(27) |
Aug
(75) |
Sep
(21) |
Oct
(42) |
Nov
(25) |
Dec
(31) |
| 2019 |
Jan
(39) |
Feb
(28) |
Mar
(19) |
Apr
(7) |
May
(30) |
Jun
(22) |
Jul
(54) |
Aug
(36) |
Sep
(19) |
Oct
(33) |
Nov
(36) |
Dec
(32) |
| 2020 |
Jan
(29) |
Feb
(38) |
Mar
(29) |
Apr
(30) |
May
(39) |
Jun
(45) |
Jul
(31) |
Aug
(52) |
Sep
(40) |
Oct
(8) |
Nov
(48) |
Dec
(30) |
| 2021 |
Jan
(35) |
Feb
(32) |
Mar
(23) |
Apr
(55) |
May
(43) |
Jun
(63) |
Jul
(17) |
Aug
(24) |
Sep
(9) |
Oct
(31) |
Nov
(67) |
Dec
(55) |
| 2022 |
Jan
(31) |
Feb
(48) |
Mar
(76) |
Apr
(18) |
May
(13) |
Jun
(46) |
Jul
(75) |
Aug
(54) |
Sep
(59) |
Oct
(65) |
Nov
(44) |
Dec
(7) |
| 2023 |
Jan
(38) |
Feb
(32) |
Mar
(35) |
Apr
(23) |
May
(46) |
Jun
(53) |
Jul
(18) |
Aug
(10) |
Sep
(24) |
Oct
(15) |
Nov
(40) |
Dec
(6) |
|
From: Miroslav L. <mli...@re...> - 2022-07-20 13:23:44
|
On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 03:12:39PM +0200, Jakub Raczyński wrote: > phc2sys[2031.823]: lan1 sys offset 4870 s0 freq +0 delay 1875 > phc2sys[2032.824]: lan1 sys offset 4915 s0 freq +0 delay 1875 > phc2sys[2033.824]: lan1 sys offset 5011 s0 freq +0 delay 1750 > phc2sys[2034.825]: port 360712.fffe.52efd6-1 changed state > phc2sys[2034.826]: reconfiguring after port state change > phc2sys[2034.828]: master clock not ready, waiting... > phc2sys[2035.828]: port 360712.fffe.52efd6-1 changed state > phc2sys[2035.830]: reconfiguring after port state change > phc2sys[2035.831]: selecting CLOCK_REALTIME for synchronization > phc2sys[2035.832]: selecting lan1 as the master clock > phc2sys[2035.833]: CLOCK_REALTIME phc offset -5136 s0 freq +0 delay 1875 > phc2sys[2036.834]: CLOCK_REALTIME phc offset -4435 s0 freq +0 delay 1875 > > So, as mentioned "That is not expected to work" but kinda did or seemed like it. Would need more research and debugging what is actually happening inside both servos. There is only one SHM segment and it's used by ntpd for synchronization of the system clock. When phc2sys reverses the direction, the offset will flip the sign, intending to synchronize the PHC to the system clock, but ntpd will still be using the data it receives to synchronize the system clock, which will cause a positive feedback loop and the clock will be steered away, stepped, or ntpd will give up depending on its configuration. -- Miroslav Lichvar |
|
From: Jakub R. <j.r...@el...> - 2022-07-20 13:12:52
|
<j.r...@el...> wrote: > > > > 20.07.2022 13:33 Miroslav Lichvar <mli...@re...> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 12:06:43PM +0200, Jakub Raczyński wrote: > > > I was trying to setup gPTP using linuxptp (ptp4l + phc2sys) that would allow two way synchronization using ntpd. Setup without ntpd (synchronizing CLOCK_REALTIME) seems to be working perfectly. > > > However with ntpd is that when in network there is no external gPTP Master available and device does become Master itself it may synchronize itself to its own shm memory. > > > > > > > > > phc2sys is run using: /usr/sbin/phc2sys -a -r -r -f /etc/ptp4l.cfg -E ntpshm -M 4 > > > > That is not expected to work. phc2sys has only one servo and ntpshm > > can be used only in one direction. > > > > You would need a second phc2sys instance with an option to only synchronize > > the PHC, when the port is in master state. > > > > As a workaround, you could write a script that would monitor the state > > and start/stop phc2sys as needed. > > Best option would be if phc2sys could exist as Master-only (only '-r' flag without '-a -r'). Such case could probably only useful for ntpshm servo that can be used in Time Servers that use different sources of synchronization (like GPS + PTP in our case). But as you said, right now only option seems to be such workaround. > > Maybe such option would be worthy TODO? > Although, I would like to show one thing I accomplished with mentioned setup (phc2sys configuration). Other than that bug it seemed to have worked, although i have no idea what was really going inside the servo to judge if this was bug or intended. Example: - Switching from Slave to Master: phc2sys[1968.791]: CLOCK_REALTIME phc offset 644 s0 freq +0 delay 1750 phc2sys[1969.791]: CLOCK_REALTIME phc offset 512 s0 freq +0 delay 1875 phc2sys[1970.792]: port 360712.fffe.52efd6-1 changed state phc2sys[1970.793]: reconfiguring after port state change phc2sys[1970.794]: selecting lan1 for synchronization phc2sys[1970.794]: selecting CLOCK_REALTIME as the master clock phc2sys[1970.794]: lan1 sys offset -433 s0 freq +0 delay 1875 phc2sys[1971.795]: lan1 sys offset -364 s0 freq +0 delay 1875 phc2sys[1972.795]: lan1 sys offset -231 s0 freq +0 delay 1875 phc2sys[1973.796]: lan1 sys offset -205 s0 freq +0 delay 1875 - Switching from Slave to Master phc2sys[2031.823]: lan1 sys offset 4870 s0 freq +0 delay 1875 phc2sys[2032.824]: lan1 sys offset 4915 s0 freq +0 delay 1875 phc2sys[2033.824]: lan1 sys offset 5011 s0 freq +0 delay 1750 phc2sys[2034.825]: port 360712.fffe.52efd6-1 changed state phc2sys[2034.826]: reconfiguring after port state change phc2sys[2034.828]: master clock not ready, waiting... phc2sys[2035.828]: port 360712.fffe.52efd6-1 changed state phc2sys[2035.830]: reconfiguring after port state change phc2sys[2035.831]: selecting CLOCK_REALTIME for synchronization phc2sys[2035.832]: selecting lan1 as the master clock phc2sys[2035.833]: CLOCK_REALTIME phc offset -5136 s0 freq +0 delay 1875 phc2sys[2036.834]: CLOCK_REALTIME phc offset -4435 s0 freq +0 delay 1875 So, as mentioned "That is not expected to work" but kinda did or seemed like it. Would need more research and debugging what is actually happening inside both servos. Best regards Jakub Raczynski |
|
From: Jakub R. <j.r...@el...> - 2022-07-20 11:52:13
|
> 20.07.2022 13:33 Miroslav Lichvar <mli...@re...> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 12:06:43PM +0200, Jakub Raczyński wrote: > > I was trying to setup gPTP using linuxptp (ptp4l + phc2sys) that would allow two way synchronization using ntpd. Setup without ntpd (synchronizing CLOCK_REALTIME) seems to be working perfectly. > > However with ntpd is that when in network there is no external gPTP Master available and device does become Master itself it may synchronize itself to its own shm memory. > > > > > > phc2sys is run using: /usr/sbin/phc2sys -a -r -r -f /etc/ptp4l.cfg -E ntpshm -M 4 > > That is not expected to work. phc2sys has only one servo and ntpshm > can be used only in one direction. > > You would need a second phc2sys instance with an option to only synchronize > the PHC, when the port is in master state. > > As a workaround, you could write a script that would monitor the state > and start/stop phc2sys as needed. Best option would be if phc2sys could exist as Master-only (only '-r' flag without '-a -r'). Such case could probably only useful for ntpshm servo that can be used in Time Servers that use different sources of synchronization (like GPS + PTP in our case). But as you said, right now only option seems to be such workaround. Maybe such option would be worthy TODO? > > While testing devices with gPTP we encountered, in my opinion, quite inconsequential behavior. Using different setups, I set following flags and had following outcome: > > > > > > gmCapable = 0 , slaveOnly = 0 -> OK > > gmCapable = 1 , slaveOnly = 0 -> OK > > gmCapable = 0 , slaveOnly = 1 -> Cannot mix 1588 slaveOnly with 802.1AS !gmCapable > > gmCapable = 1 , slaveOnly = 1 -> OK > > > > > > Frankly, I would expect combination of "gmCapable = 1 , slaveOnly = 1" to fail with than "gmCapable = 0 , slaveOnly = 1". > > > > > > > > I would like to ask for reasoning behind that combination block and not the other. Since SlaveOnly flag performs as expected, even for gPTP setup. > > I'm not sure. If slaveOnly is 1, the clock will not ever be a > grandmaster, i.e. not try to send sync messages. What would be > different with gmCapable of 0? > 'gmCapable 0 + slaveOnly 0' does send Announce messages but from other Slave devices we can only see "master clock not ready, waiting..." and they are locked into LISTENING state, which is quite different. So we were using 'slaveOnly 1' to not pollute network with excessive devices. Anyway, thanks for the help. Best regards Jakub Raczynski |
|
From: Miroslav L. <mli...@re...> - 2022-07-20 11:33:29
|
On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 12:06:43PM +0200, Jakub Raczyński wrote: > I was trying to setup gPTP using linuxptp (ptp4l + phc2sys) that would allow two way synchronization using ntpd. Setup without ntpd (synchronizing CLOCK_REALTIME) seems to be working perfectly. > However with ntpd is that when in network there is no external gPTP Master available and device does become Master itself it may synchronize itself to its own shm memory. > > > phc2sys is run using: /usr/sbin/phc2sys -a -r -r -f /etc/ptp4l.cfg -E ntpshm -M 4 That is not expected to work. phc2sys has only one servo and ntpshm can be used only in one direction. You would need a second phc2sys instance with an option to only synchronize the PHC, when the port is in master state. As a workaround, you could write a script that would monitor the state and start/stop phc2sys as needed. > While testing devices with gPTP we encountered, in my opinion, quite inconsequential behavior. Using different setups, I set following flags and had following outcome: > > > gmCapable = 0 , slaveOnly = 0 -> OK > gmCapable = 1 , slaveOnly = 0 -> OK > gmCapable = 0 , slaveOnly = 1 -> Cannot mix 1588 slaveOnly with 802.1AS !gmCapable > gmCapable = 1 , slaveOnly = 1 -> OK > > > Frankly, I would expect combination of "gmCapable = 1 , slaveOnly = 1" to fail with than "gmCapable = 0 , slaveOnly = 1". > > > > I would like to ask for reasoning behind that combination block and not the other. Since SlaveOnly flag performs as expected, even for gPTP setup. I'm not sure. If slaveOnly is 1, the clock will not ever be a grandmaster, i.e. not try to send sync messages. What would be different with gmCapable of 0? -- Miroslav Lichvar |
|
From: Jakub R. <j.r...@el...> - 2022-07-20 10:33:35
|
Greetings, I was trying to setup gPTP using linuxptp (ptp4l + phc2sys) that would allow two way synchronization using ntpd. Setup without ntpd (synchronizing CLOCK_REALTIME) seems to be working perfectly. However with ntpd is that when in network there is no external gPTP Master available and device does become Master itself it may synchronize itself to its own shm memory. phc2sys is run using: /usr/sbin/phc2sys -a -r -r -f /etc/ptp4l.cfg -E ntpshm -M 4 Example of problem: remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter ======================================================================== 127.127.28.2 .GPS. 0 l - 8 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 x127.127.28.3 .RTC. 0 l - 8 7 0.000 0.007 0.004 *127.127.28.4 .PTP. 0 l - 8 17 0.000 37000.0 0.010 sending: GET PORT_DATA_SET 360712.fffe.52efd6-1 seq 0 RESPONSE MANAGEMENT PORT_DATA_SET portIdentity 360712.fffe.52efd6-1 portState MASTER logMinDelayReqInterval 0 peerMeanPathDelay 10259 logAnnounceInterval 0 announceReceiptTimeout 3 logSyncInterval 0 delayMechanism 2 logMinPdelayReqInterval 0 versionNumber 2 This can be reproduced by having internal source (RTC in this case) being started first and having significant offset from PTP (that is preferred source in ntpd) which will cause ntpd to restart. After ntpd restart PTP starts to synchronize ntpshm although in PMC it is still Master device. This also creates "zombie servo" (as I did name it) -> in case from the example, phc2sys will still synchronize ntpd, even after killing ptp4l process. To fix that issue all 3 processes (ptp4l, phc2sys and ntpd) have to be killed. Although in example it is caused directly by incorrectly set ptpTimescale flag, it can be caused just by having significant offset to PTP. I would like to ask if you have any idea what could be cause of this? I did expect that Master device would not synchronize ntpshm. Is it possible to achieve two-way synchronization using phc2sys + ptp4l for ntpshm (as said, it seems to work perfectly for CLOCK_REALTIME) ? What is the flag or field that selects direction of synchronization in ptp4l? Or is it controlled by ntpd in that case? Second thing I would like to ask about is: While testing devices with gPTP we encountered, in my opinion, quite inconsequential behavior. Using different setups, I set following flags and had following outcome: gmCapable = 0 , slaveOnly = 0 -> OK gmCapable = 1 , slaveOnly = 0 -> OK gmCapable = 0 , slaveOnly = 1 -> Cannot mix 1588 slaveOnly with 802.1AS !gmCapable gmCapable = 1 , slaveOnly = 1 -> OK Frankly, I would expect combination of "gmCapable = 1 , slaveOnly = 1" to fail with than "gmCapable = 0 , slaveOnly = 1". I would like to ask for reasoning behind that combination block and not the other. Since SlaveOnly flag performs as expected, even for gPTP setup. Best regards, Jakub Raczynski |
|
From: Miroslav L. <mli...@re...> - 2022-07-20 08:04:12
|
On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 09:02:37PM -0700, Richard Cochran wrote: > > I am not sure how accurate a software timestamp for a wifi device would > > be, given the potential delay between timestamp and actual transmission. > > WiFi on Linux is never going to support PTP. The issue is the closed > source radio firmware. End of story. I tested driver TX timestamping in the mt76 driver, where the firmware is supposed to be very simple, but IIRC it didn't make a noticeable difference when compared to user-space TX timestamping. But if there is demand, I think we could see wireless chips with HW-timestamping support in future. If the stations can hear each other, maybe it wouldn't even be necessary for the access point to support PTP, like when using a cheap Ethernet hub instead of expensive switch with PTP support. -- Miroslav Lichvar |
|
From: Richard C. <ric...@gm...> - 2022-07-20 04:02:46
|
On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 04:55:35PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote: > > > On 7/19/2022 2:13 PM, Mohammad wrote: > > Hello, > > > > i am using Ath9k driver to implement Wifi-ptp . This won't work. Better to simply use NTP instead. > > in the README.org is is written adding this capability entails adding a > > single line of code to the device driver. > > > > Which Code of line and where should be this line added? That statement only applies to Ethernet MAC drivers. > I am not sure how accurate a software timestamp for a wifi device would > be, given the potential delay between timestamp and actual transmission. WiFi on Linux is never going to support PTP. The issue is the closed source radio firmware. End of story. Thanks, Richard |
|
From: Jacob K. <jac...@in...> - 2022-07-19 23:55:51
|
On 7/19/2022 2:13 PM, Mohammad wrote: > Hello, > > i am using Ath9k driver to implement Wifi-ptp . > > the ethtool tool shows, the interface does not support neither software > nor hardware timestamping. > so how can i add software-transmit (SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_SOFTWARE) > capability to the driver? > Right. This requires driver support. > in the README.org is is written adding this capability entails adding a > single line of code to the device driver. > > Which Code of line and where should be this line added? > Strictly speaking its not "one" line, because you probably want to report the feature as supported via ethtool as well. You need to add a skb_tx_timestamp call to your transmit routine as close as possible to where you hand the socket buffer off to the hardware. This is the "one line" that is referred to above. You also will want to extend your driver's ethtool implementation of .get_ts_info to report the timestamping You can assign it to ethtool_op_get_ts_info since this reports software timestamping. Those are the two lines you would need to implement in the driver. I am not sure how accurate a software timestamp for a wifi device would be, given the potential delay between timestamp and actual transmission. Hope this helps. Regards, Jake > Thanks. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Linuxptp-users mailing list > Lin...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-users |
|
From: Mohammad <m.a...@gm...> - 2022-07-19 21:13:59
|
<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:"Segoe UI"; panose-1:2 11 5 2 4 2 4 2 2 3;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {margin:0cm; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only;} @page WordSection1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 2.0cm 70.85pt;} div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;} --></style></head><body lang=DE link=blue vlink="#954F72" style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><div><p style='margin-bottom:12.0pt;background:white'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI",sans-serif;color:#24292F'>Hello,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0cm;background:white;box-sizing: border-box;font-variant-ligatures: normal;font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: 2;text-align:start;widows: 2;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;text-decoration-thickness: initial;text-decoration-style: initial;text-decoration-color: initial;word-spacing:0px'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI",sans-serif;color:#24292F'>i am using Ath9k driver to implement Wifi-ptp .<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0cm;background:white;box-sizing: border-box;font-variant-ligatures: normal;font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: 2;text-align:start;widows: 2;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;text-decoration-thickness: initial;text-decoration-style: initial;text-decoration-color: initial;word-spacing:0px'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI",sans-serif;color:#24292F'>the ethtool tool shows, the interface does not support neither software nor hardware timestamping.<br>so how can i add software-transmit (SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_SOFTWARE) capability to the driver?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0cm;background:white;box-sizing: border-box;font-variant-ligatures: normal;font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: 2;text-align:start;widows: 2;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;text-decoration-thickness: initial;text-decoration-style: initial;text-decoration-color: initial;word-spacing:0px'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI",sans-serif;color:#24292F'>in the README.org is is written adding this capability entails adding a single line of code to the device driver.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0cm;background:white;box-sizing: border-box;font-variant-ligatures: normal;font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: 2;text-align:start;widows: 2;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;text-decoration-thickness: initial;text-decoration-style: initial;text-decoration-color: initial;word-spacing:0px'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI",sans-serif;color:#24292F'>Which Code of line and where should be this line added?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='margin-top:0cm;background:white;box-sizing: border-box;font-variant-ligatures: normal;font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: 2;text-align:start;widows: 2;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;text-decoration-thickness: initial;text-decoration-style: initial;text-decoration-color: initial;word-spacing:0px'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI",sans-serif;color:#24292F'>Thanks.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html> |
|
From: Mohammad <m.a...@gm...> - 2022-07-19 21:04:51
|
<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:"Segoe UI"; panose-1:2 11 5 2 4 2 4 2 2 3;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {margin:0cm; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-priority:99; color:blue; text-decoration:underline;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only;} @page WordSection1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 2.0cm 70.85pt;} div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;} --></style></head><body lang=DE link=blue vlink="#954F72" style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><div><p style='margin-bottom:12.0pt;background:white'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI",sans-serif;color:#24292F'>Hello,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0cm;background:white;box-sizing: border-box;font-variant-ligatures: normal;font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: 2;text-align:start;widows: 2;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;text-decoration-thickness: initial;text-decoration-style: initial;text-decoration-color: initial;word-spacing:0px'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI",sans-serif;color:#24292F'>i am using Ath9k driver to implement Wifi-ptp .<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0cm;background:white;box-sizing: border-box;font-variant-ligatures: normal;font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: 2;text-align:start;widows: 2;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;text-decoration-thickness: initial;text-decoration-style: initial;text-decoration-color: initial;word-spacing:0px'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI",sans-serif;color:#24292F'>the ethtool tool shows, the interface does not support neither software nor hardware timestamping.<br>so how can i add software-transmit (SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_SOFTWARE) capability to the driver?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0cm;background:white;box-sizing: border-box;font-variant-ligatures: normal;font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: 2;text-align:start;widows: 2;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;text-decoration-thickness: initial;text-decoration-style: initial;text-decoration-color: initial;word-spacing:0px'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI",sans-serif;color:#24292F'>in the README.org of the linuxptp is written, adding this capability entails adding a single line of code to the device driver.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:0cm;background:white;box-sizing: border-box;font-variant-ligatures: normal;font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: 2;text-align:start;widows: 2;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;text-decoration-thickness: initial;text-decoration-style: initial;text-decoration-color: initial;word-spacing:0px'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI",sans-serif;color:#24292F'>Which line of Code and where should be this line add?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='margin-top:0cm;background:white;box-sizing: border-box;font-variant-ligatures: normal;font-variant-caps: normal;orphans: 2;text-align:start;widows: 2;-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;text-decoration-thickness: initial;text-decoration-style: initial;text-decoration-color: initial;word-spacing:0px'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI",sans-serif;color:#24292F'>Thanks.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Gesendet von <a href="https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986">Mail</a> für Windows</p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html> |
|
From: Marco D. (SIDN) <mar...@si...> - 2022-07-19 15:30:16
|
Hi, Op 18-07-2022 om 11:28 schreef Miroslav Lichvar: > No, there is no option to disable management messages. I managed to do it on the layer 3 level with iptables and am happy with the result (want to do some further testing though). L2 Should be doable in a similar fashion, but I don't need that for now. Method one: iptables -A INPUT -i eno2 -p udp --dport 320 -m string --algo bm --from 28 --to 29 --hex-string '|0d|' -j DROP -m comment --comment "DROP Management message" ip6tables -A INPUT -i eno2 -p udp --dport 320 -m string --algo bm --from 48 --to 49 --hex-string '|0d|' -j DROP -m comment --comment "DROP Management message" Alternative method: iptables -A INPUT -i eno2 -p udp --dport 320 -m u32 --u32 "25 & 0xFF = 0x0d" -j DROP -m comment --comment "DROP Management message" ip6tables -A INPUT -i eno2 -p udp --dport 320 -m u32 --u32 "45 & 0xFF = 0x0d" -j DROP -m comment --comment "DROP Management message" Feedback welcome! DISCLAIMER (and some advice): Please use a your own risk and try to understand what the rules are doing, before actually applying them. -- Marco |
|
From: Miroslav L. <mli...@re...> - 2022-07-18 09:29:11
|
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 08:46:24AM +0200, Marco Davids (SIDN) via Linuxptp-users wrote: > Hi, > > Even though I understand that Linuxptp has not supported many SET and CMD > PMC-messages yet, I would still like know if there are ways to disable PTP > managment messages, in order to prevent (rogue) clients from messing things > up. > > Is this possible? No, there is no option to disable management messages. SET and CMD commands are not allowed over network, but that doesn't prevent rogue clients from pretending to be a better master clock and take control over other clients. -- Miroslav Lichvar |
|
From: Marco D. (SIDN) <mar...@si...> - 2022-07-18 09:21:09
|
Hi, Even though I understand that Linuxptp has not supported many SET and CMD PMC-messages yet, I would still like know if there are ways to disable PTP managment messages, in order to prevent (rogue) clients from messing things up. Is this possible? -- Marco |
|
From: Miroslav L. <mli...@re...> - 2022-07-18 07:06:30
|
On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 06:10:57PM +0800, Kevin Choo wrote: > I am trying to test ptp implementation with ptp4l as the ptp master on a > Linux pc and another ptp slave on evaluation board. Facing a weird issue > where the ptp4l in master mode does not return delay response message when > the slave is sending delay request message. Does it work with ptp4l as a client? -- Miroslav Lichvar |
|
From: Kevin C. <kev...@an...> - 2022-07-15 10:32:14
|
<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:DengXian; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:"\@DengXian"; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {margin:0in; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;} p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph {mso-style-priority:34; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only;} @page WordSection1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;} div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;} /* List Definitions */ @list l0 {mso-list-id:301271078; mso-list-type:hybrid; mso-list-template-ids:-1496391856 -1 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;} @list l0:level1 {mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in;} @list l0:level2 {mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in;} @list l0:level3 {mso-level-number-format:roman-lower; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:right; text-indent:-9.0pt;} @list l0:level4 {mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in;} @list l0:level5 {mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in;} @list l0:level6 {mso-level-number-format:roman-lower; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:right; text-indent:-9.0pt;} @list l0:level7 {mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in;} @list l0:level8 {mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in;} @list l0:level9 {mso-level-number-format:roman-lower; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:right; text-indent:-9.0pt;} ol {margin-bottom:0in;} ul {margin-bottom:0in;} --></style></head><body lang=EN-US style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Hi all,</p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I am trying to test ptp implementation with ptp4l as the ptp master on a Linux pc and another ptp slave on evaluation board. Facing a weird issue where the ptp4l in master mode does not return delay response message when the slave is sending delay request message.</p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Ptp4l log:</p><p class=MsoNormal>[kevin@localhost etc]$ sudo ptp4l -f /etc/ptp4l.conf -i enp3s0 -m</p><p class=MsoNormal>ptp4l[3024235.167]: selected /dev/ptp0 as PTP clock</p><p class=MsoNormal>ptp4l[3024235.168]: port 1: INITIALIZING to LISTENING on INIT_COMPLETE</p><p class=MsoNormal>ptp4l[3024235.169]: port 0: INITIALIZING to LISTENING on INIT_COMPLETE</p><p class=MsoNormal>ptp4l[3024241.381]: port 1: LISTENING to MASTER on ANNOUNCE_RECEIPT_TIMEOUT_EXPIRES</p><p class=MsoNormal>ptp4l[3024241.381]: selected local clock 6805ca.fffe.1cb488 as best master</p><p class=MsoNormal>ptp4l[3024241.381]: assuming the grand master role</p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Some preliminary testing that I have done but with no luck:</p><ol style='margin-top:0in' start=1 type=1><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'>Check that ptp4l is listening to port 319 and 320 with netstat -anpe</li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'>Disable firewall (in case firewall is preventing the udp port listening)</li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'>Look into the packets with wireshark. Detect no issue with the sync, follow-up and delay req packets.</li></ol><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Appreciate it if anyone can suggest any pointers for me to continue debug on this matter.</p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Thank you.</p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><i>Best regards,<o:p></o:p></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i>Kevin<o:p></o:p></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html> |
|
From: Osterried M. (ETAS-DAP/XPC-Fe3) <mar...@et...> - 2022-07-14 14:08:19
|
Hi Miroslav,
yes, this patch helps in my use case, thanks.
Regards
Markus
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a bug.
Can you please try it with this patch?
--- a/port.c
+++ b/port.c
@@ -2708,7 +2708,8 @@ void port_link_status(void *ctx, int linkup, int ts_index)
/* Only switch phc with HW time stamping mode */
if (interface_tsinfo_valid(p->iface) &&
- interface_phc_index(p->iface) >= 0) {
+ interface_phc_index(p->iface) >= 0 &&
+ interface_get_vclock(p->iface) < 0) {
required_modes = clock_required_modes(p->clock);
if (!interface_tsmodes_supported(p->iface, required_modes)) {
pr_err("interface '%s' does not support requested "
--
Miroslav Lichvar
|
|
From: ramesh t <ram...@ya...> - 2022-07-14 14:04:02
|
Hello Miroslav Lichvar,
Ptp4l instance is running fine and only one instance is running. But phc2sys is getting struck.
RegardsRamesh
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 06:05:32 PM GMT+5:30, Miroslav Lichvar <mli...@re...> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 05:36:42PM +0000, ramesh t via Linuxptp-devel wrote:
> As part of testing, we are doing disable and enable of PTP on the switch.
> Sometimes we are observing phc2sys process struck on "Waiting for ptp4l".
> Jun 30 15:56:42 ptp4l: [113418.006] rms 4 max 6 freq +4822 +/- 6 delay 232 +/- 0
> Jun 30 15:56:43 ptp4l: [113419.006] rms 3 max 6 freq +4817 +/- 5 delay 232 +/- 0
> Jun 30 15:56:44 phc2sys: [113419.955] uds: sendto failed: No such file or directory
This looks like something removed the Unix domain socket, possibly a
different ptp4l instance using the same configuration. Are you sure
there is always only one ptp4l running with the same uds_address?
--
Miroslav Lichvar
|
|
From: Miroslav L. <mli...@re...> - 2022-07-14 12:35:44
|
On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 05:36:42PM +0000, ramesh t via Linuxptp-devel wrote: > As part of testing, we are doing disable and enable of PTP on the switch. > Sometimes we are observing phc2sys process struck on "Waiting for ptp4l". > Jun 30 15:56:42 ptp4l: [113418.006] rms 4 max 6 freq +4822 +/- 6 delay 232 +/- 0 > Jun 30 15:56:43 ptp4l: [113419.006] rms 3 max 6 freq +4817 +/- 5 delay 232 +/- 0 > Jun 30 15:56:44 phc2sys: [113419.955] uds: sendto failed: No such file or directory This looks like something removed the Unix domain socket, possibly a different ptp4l instance using the same configuration. Are you sure there is always only one ptp4l running with the same uds_address? -- Miroslav Lichvar |
|
From: ramesh t <ram...@ya...> - 2022-07-14 11:52:41
|
hi, Please suggest, we are using linuxptp 2.0 version. regards, Ramesh ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: ramesh t <ram...@ya...> To: Aya Levin via Linuxptp-devel <lin...@li...>; Linuxptp-users <lin...@li...>; Richard Cochran <ric...@gm...> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 11:06:42 PM GMT+5:30 Subject: phc2sys struck on "waiting for ptp4l" Hello, Have connected Server to a switch. The switch act as a Boundary clock and provides timing to the server using ptp. On the server, we are running ptp4l and phc2sys process. As part of testing, we are doing disable and enable of PTP on the switch. Sometimes we are observing phc2sys process struck on "Waiting for ptp4l". Please let me know if this is fixed in latest releases? regards, Ramesh Jun 30 15:56:16 ptp4l: [113392.006] handle_state_decision_event PS_SLAVE Jun 30 15:56:16 ptp4l: [113392.006] port 1: LISTENING to UNCALIBRATED on RS_SLAVE Jun 30 15:56:16 ptp4l: [113392.006] PS_SLAVE: port_e2e_transition Jun 30 15:56:16 ptp4l: [113392.126] port 1: UNCALIBRATED to SLAVE on MASTER_CLOCK_SELECTED Jun 30 15:56:16 ptp4l: [113392.126] PS_SLAVE: port_e2e_transition Jun 30 15:56:17 ptp4l: [113393.006] rms 1059386 max 2163105 freq -2207284 +/- 920482 delay -41410 +/- 25811 Jun 30 15:56:17 ptp4l: [113393.261] selected best master clock 40b5c1.fffe.7b083f Jun 30 15:56:17 ptp4l: [113393.261] handle_state_decision_event PS_SLAVE Jun 30 15:56:18 ptp4l: [113394.006] rms 397954 max 489864 freq -407181 +/- 377766 delay -13706 +/- 7315 Jun 30 15:56:19 ptp4l: [113395.006] rms 376195 max 475259 freq +255291 +/- 51294 delay 1286 +/- 1440 Jun 30 15:56:20 ptp4l: [113396.006] rms 127843 max 219841 freq +205626 +/- 48533 delay 3164 +/- 594 Jun 30 15:56:21 ptp4l: [113397.006] rms 19534 max 29511 freq +57700 +/- 31071 delay 1541 +/- 934 Jun 30 15:56:22 ptp4l: [113398.006] rms 27033 max 30256 freq -5731 +/- 7417 delay 227 +/- 124 Jun 30 15:56:23 ptp4l: [113399.006] rms 11949 max 18787 freq -10217 +/- 2374 delay -99 +/- 64 Jun 30 15:56:24 ptp4l: [113400.006] rms 1772 max 3816 freq -848 +/- 2494 delay 99 +/- 51 Jun 30 15:56:25 ptp4l: [113401.006] rms 1794 max 1914 freq +4826 +/- 825 delay 213 +/- 20 Jun 30 15:56:26 ptp4l: [113402.006] rms 1056 max 1526 freq +5878 +/- 84 delay 247 +/- 5 Jun 30 15:56:26 ptp4l: [113402.126] EV_STATUS_REPORT_TIMEOUT_EXPIRES Jun 30 15:56:27 ptp4l: [113403.006] rms 229 max 454 freq +5348 +/- 179 delay 247 +/- 3 Jun 30 15:56:28 ptp4l: [113404.010] rms 103 max 122 freq +4892 +/- 80 delay 234 +/- 3 Jun 30 15:56:29 ptp4l: [113405.006] rms 90 max 115 freq +4747 +/- 11 delay 232 +/- 1 Jun 30 15:56:30 ptp4l: [113406.006] rms 26 max 50 freq +4772 +/- 14 delay 231 +/- 1 Jun 30 15:56:31 ptp4l: [113407.006] rms 8 max 15 freq +4811 +/- 10 delay 232 +/- 0 Jun 30 15:56:32 ptp4l: [113408.006] rms 9 max 17 freq +4827 +/- 6 delay 232 +/- 1 Jun 30 15:56:33 ptp4l: [113409.006] rms 5 max 11 freq +4826 +/- 7 delay 232 +/- 1 Jun 30 15:56:34 ptp4l: [113410.006] rms 3 max 6 freq +4824 +/- 5 delay 233 +/- 1 Jun 30 15:56:35 ptp4l: [113411.006] rms 3 max 7 freq +4825 +/- 6 delay 232 +/- 0 Jun 30 15:56:36 ptp4l: [113412.006] rms 3 max 5 freq +4824 +/- 6 delay 232 +/- 1 Jun 30 15:56:37 ptp4l: [113413.006] rms 3 max 6 freq +4823 +/- 5 delay 232 +/- 0 Jun 30 15:56:38 ptp4l: [113414.006] rms 3 max 6 freq +4820 +/- 5 delay 232 +/- 0 Jun 30 15:56:39 ptp4l: [113415.006] rms 3 max 6 freq +4821 +/- 5 delay 232 +/- 1 Jun 30 15:56:40 ptp4l: [113416.006] rms 3 max 6 freq +4821 +/- 5 delay 233 +/- 1 Jun 30 15:56:41 ptp4l: [113417.006] rms 3 max 7 freq +4821 +/- 5 delay 233 +/- 1 Jun 30 15:56:42 ptp4l: [113418.006] rms 4 max 6 freq +4822 +/- 6 delay 232 +/- 0 Jun 30 15:56:43 ptp4l: [113419.006] rms 3 max 6 freq +4817 +/- 5 delay 232 +/- 0 Jun 30 15:56:44 phc2sys: [113419.955] uds: sendto failed: No such file or directory Jun 30 15:56:44 ptp4l: [113420.010] rms 3 max 6 freq +4818 +/- 5 delay 232 +/- 0 Jun 30 15:56:45 phc2sys: [113420.959] Waiting for ptp4l... Jun 30 15:56:45 phc2sys: [113420.959] uds: sendto failed: No such file or directory Jun 30 15:56:45 ptp4l: [113421.006] rms 3 max 6 freq +4816 +/- 5 delay 232 +/- 0 Jun 30 15:56:46 phc2sys: [113421.962] Waiting for ptp4l... Jun 30 15:56:46 phc2sys: [113421.962] uds: sendto failed: No such file or directory Jun 30 15:56:46 ptp4l: [113422.006] rms 4 max 6 freq +4810 +/- 5 delay 232 +/- 0 Jun 30 15:56:47 phc2sys: [113422.963] Waiting for ptp4l... Jun 30 15:56:47 phc2sys: [113422.963] uds: sendto failed: No such file or directory Jun 30 15:56:47 ptp4l: [113423.006] rms 3 max 5 freq +4809 +/- 5 delay 232 +/- 0 Jun 30 15:56:48 phc2sys: [113423.966] Waiting for ptp4l... Jun 30 15:56:48 phc2sys: [113423.966] uds: sendto failed: No such file or directory Jun 30 15:56:48 ptp4l: [113424.006] rms 4 max 9 freq +4815 +/- 6 delay 232 +/- 1 Jun 30 15:56:49 phc2sys: [113424.967] Waiting for ptp4l... Jun 30 15:56:49 phc2sys: [113424.967] uds: sendto failed: No such file or directory Jun 30 15:56:49 ptp4l: [113425.006] rms 3 max 6 freq +4815 +/- 5 delay 232 +/- 0 Jun 30 15:56:50 phc2sys: [113425.971] Waiting for ptp4l... Jun 30 15:56:50 phc2sys: [113425.971] uds: sendto failed: No such file or directory |
|
From: Miroslav L. <mli...@re...> - 2022-07-14 10:22:26
|
On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 10:30:56AM +0000, Osterried Markus (ETAS-DAP/XPC-Fe3) via Linuxptp-users wrote:
> This is an extract of the messages when ptp4l starts, then link goes down and link goes up again:
> ptp4l[10842.853]: selected /dev/ptp2 as PTP clock
> ptp4l[10842.854]: port 1 (swp0): /dev/ptp2 is virtual clock
> ptp4l[10864.838]: port 1 (swp0): link down
> ptp4l[10878.197]: port 1 (swp0): link up
> ptp4l[10878.202]: Switching PHC, failed to open /dev/ptp1: Device or resource busy
>
> It seems when link goes up ptp4l wants to switch from requested /dev/ptp2 to physical clock /dev/ptp1, which fails.
> Why does ptp4l switch the PHC when link is changed?
It's a bug.
Can you please try it with this patch?
--- a/port.c
+++ b/port.c
@@ -2708,7 +2708,8 @@ void port_link_status(void *ctx, int linkup, int ts_index)
/* Only switch phc with HW time stamping mode */
if (interface_tsinfo_valid(p->iface) &&
- interface_phc_index(p->iface) >= 0) {
+ interface_phc_index(p->iface) >= 0 &&
+ interface_get_vclock(p->iface) < 0) {
required_modes = clock_required_modes(p->clock);
if (!interface_tsmodes_supported(p->iface, required_modes)) {
pr_err("interface '%s' does not support requested "
--
Miroslav Lichvar
|
|
From: Richard C. <ric...@gm...> - 2022-07-14 03:40:02
|
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 02:25:14AM +0000, joy...@ar... wrote: > It is strange how the ptp4l slave can select a non-conformant GM as best master but not a conformant GM. Unfortunate that such non-conformance would be allowed to go undetected. Whatever. |
|
From: Osterried M. (ETAS-DAP/XPC-Fe3) <mar...@et...> - 2022-07-13 17:05:19
|
Hi, I have built from latest linuxptp snapshot, because I want to use the virtual clock support. I have created two virtual clocks (/dev/ptp2 and /dev/ptp3), based on the physical clock /dev/ptp1: echo 2 >/sys/class/ptp/ptp1/n_vclocks Then I have started ptp4l with this command line: ./ptp4l -i swp0 --phc_index=2 -m This is an extract of the messages when ptp4l starts, then link goes down and link goes up again: ptp4l[10842.853]: selected /dev/ptp2 as PTP clock ptp4l[10842.854]: port 1 (swp0): /dev/ptp2 is virtual clock ptp4l[10864.838]: port 1 (swp0): link down ptp4l[10878.197]: port 1 (swp0): link up ptp4l[10878.202]: Switching PHC, failed to open /dev/ptp1: Device or resource busy It seems when link goes up ptp4l wants to switch from requested /dev/ptp2 to physical clock /dev/ptp1, which fails. Why does ptp4l switch the PHC when link is changed? I think the given command line is the preferred one, but the behavior is the same with this command line: ./ptp4l -i swp0 -p /dev/ptp2 -m Regards Markus |
|
From: Richard C. <ric...@gm...> - 2022-07-13 14:37:54
|
On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 04:22:31PM +0200, Fabian wrote: > Hi, > > I had the same issue, systemd configurations did not affect the order of > ptpX devices. I use chrony however. My script is attached. It's not the > cleanest or nicest code but it works. +1 Using 'ethtool' is way to discover the mapping. Thanks, Richard |
|
From: Fabian <fab...@gm...> - 2022-07-13 14:23:14
|
Hi, I had the same issue, systemd configurations did not affect the order of ptpX devices. I use chrony however. My script is attached. It's not the cleanest or nicest code but it works. Hope you find some inspiration from that. Before chrony is started the script is executed via a ExecStartPre=/etc/chrony/change_ptp.py line in the service file. br Am 13.07.2022 um 15:33 schrieb Marco Davids (SIDN) via Linuxptp-users: > Hi, > > Most of the time when I reboot this Linux server, ptp0 is connected to > eno1: > > ptp4l: [18.144] eno1 selected /dev/ptp0 as PTP clock > > But sometimes this is ptp1, which is pretty annoying: > > ptp4l: [18.745] eno1 selected /dev/ptp1 as PTP clock > > Does anyone has a suggestion on how to prevent this and make the mapping > between interface and ptp device more robust? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Linuxptp-users mailing list > Lin...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-users > |
|
From: Marco D. (SIDN) <mar...@si...> - 2022-07-13 14:07:42
|
Hi, Most of the time when I reboot this Linux server, ptp0 is connected to eno1: ptp4l: [18.144] eno1 selected /dev/ptp0 as PTP clock But sometimes this is ptp1, which is pretty annoying: ptp4l: [18.745] eno1 selected /dev/ptp1 as PTP clock Does anyone has a suggestion on how to prevent this and make the mapping between interface and ptp device more robust? -- Marco |
27 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
