Menu
▾
▴
linuxptp-users
|
From: Hardik G. <har...@gm...> - 2017-01-13 01:40:52
|
Hello, I am working on Linux 3.12 running on TI AM335x. The Test system is GPS connected to CPU over Ethernet and GPS is configured to End to End protocol. following are the messages -------------------------------------- ptp4l[71468.231]: master offset -230 s2 freq -23449 path delay 15359 ptp4l[71469.232]: master offset -185 s2 freq -23473 path delay 15372 ptp4l[71470.233]: master offset 90 s2 freq -23254 path delay 15503 ptp4l[71471.234]: master offset -321 s2 freq -23638 path delay 15500 ptp4l[71472.234]: master offset 152 s2 freq -23261 path delay 15500 ptp4l[71473.235]: master offset 279 s2 freq -23088 path delay 15500 ptp4l[71474.237]: master offset -343 s2 freq -23627 path delay 15500 ptp4l[71475.242]: master offset 77 s2 freq -23310 path delay 15500 ptp4l[71476.242]: master offset 51 s2 freq -23313 path delay 15500 ptp4l[71477.242]: master offset 29 s2 freq -23319 path delay 15500 ----------------------------------------- phc2sys[71501.627]: sys offset -75 s2 freq -23336 delay 3480 phc2sys[71502.628]: sys offset 37 s2 freq -23246 delay 3521 phc2sys[71503.629]: sys offset 229 s2 freq -23043 delay 3480 phc2sys[71504.630]: sys offset -3 s2 freq -23207 delay 3560 phc2sys[71505.631]: sys offset -203 s2 freq -23408 delay 3520 phc2sys[71506.631]: sys offset -340 s2 freq -23605 delay 3440 phc2sys[71507.632]: sys offset -233 s2 freq -23600 delay 3560 phc2sys[71508.633]: sys offset -8 s2 freq -23445 delay 3480 phc2sys[71509.634]: sys offset 234 s2 freq -23206 delay 3521 phc2sys[71510.634]: sys offset 235 s2 freq -23135 delay 3560 phc2sys[71511.635]: sys offset 162 s2 freq -23137 delay 3520 phc2sys[71512.636]: sys offset 37 s2 freq -23213 delay 3520 phc2sys[71513.637]: sys offset -252 s2 freq -23491 delay 3560 phc2sys[71514.638]: sys offset -89 s2 freq -23404 delay 3560 phc2sys[71515.639]: sys offset 269 s2 freq -23073 delay 3480 ---------------------------------------------- I am trying to understand this messages. how do I know whether system time is synced to GPS and what is accuracy ?? Regards, Hardik A Gohil |
|
From: Dale S. <ds...@us...> - 2017-01-13 03:23:43
|
Offset and Delay are in nanoseconds. The Frequency is (I'm pretty sure) in parts-per billion. -Dale On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Hardik Gohil <har...@gm...> wrote: > Hello, > > I am working on Linux 3.12 running on TI AM335x. > > The Test system is GPS connected to CPU over Ethernet and GPS is configured > to End to End protocol. > > following are the messages > -------------------------------------- > ptp4l[71468.231]: master offset -230 s2 freq -23449 path delay > 15359 > ptp4l[71469.232]: master offset -185 s2 freq -23473 path delay > 15372 > ptp4l[71470.233]: master offset 90 s2 freq -23254 path delay > 15503 > ptp4l[71471.234]: master offset -321 s2 freq -23638 path delay > 15500 > ptp4l[71472.234]: master offset 152 s2 freq -23261 path delay > 15500 > ptp4l[71473.235]: master offset 279 s2 freq -23088 path delay > 15500 > ptp4l[71474.237]: master offset -343 s2 freq -23627 path delay > 15500 > ptp4l[71475.242]: master offset 77 s2 freq -23310 path delay > 15500 > ptp4l[71476.242]: master offset 51 s2 freq -23313 path delay > 15500 > ptp4l[71477.242]: master offset 29 s2 freq -23319 path delay > 15500 > ----------------------------------------- > phc2sys[71501.627]: sys offset -75 s2 freq -23336 delay 3480 > phc2sys[71502.628]: sys offset 37 s2 freq -23246 delay 3521 > phc2sys[71503.629]: sys offset 229 s2 freq -23043 delay 3480 > phc2sys[71504.630]: sys offset -3 s2 freq -23207 delay 3560 > phc2sys[71505.631]: sys offset -203 s2 freq -23408 delay 3520 > phc2sys[71506.631]: sys offset -340 s2 freq -23605 delay 3440 > phc2sys[71507.632]: sys offset -233 s2 freq -23600 delay 3560 > phc2sys[71508.633]: sys offset -8 s2 freq -23445 delay 3480 > phc2sys[71509.634]: sys offset 234 s2 freq -23206 delay 3521 > phc2sys[71510.634]: sys offset 235 s2 freq -23135 delay 3560 > phc2sys[71511.635]: sys offset 162 s2 freq -23137 delay 3520 > phc2sys[71512.636]: sys offset 37 s2 freq -23213 delay 3520 > phc2sys[71513.637]: sys offset -252 s2 freq -23491 delay 3560 > phc2sys[71514.638]: sys offset -89 s2 freq -23404 delay 3560 > phc2sys[71515.639]: sys offset 269 s2 freq -23073 delay 3480 > ---------------------------------------------- > > I am trying to understand this messages. > > how do I know whether system time is synced to GPS and what is accuracy ?? > > > > > Regards, > Hardik A Gohil > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors > Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms. > With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE. > Training and support from Colfax. > Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi > _______________________________________________ > Linuxptp-users mailing list > Lin...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-users > |
|
From: Dale S. <ds...@us...> - 2017-01-13 03:25:07
|
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 10:23 PM, Dale Smith <ds...@us...> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Hardik Gohil <har...@gm...> wrote: Apologies for top-posting... Too quick with the send. -Dale |
|
From: Hardik G. <har...@gm...> - 2017-01-13 07:31:22
|
I would like to know the accuracy of time synchronization ? And the difference between path delay and master offset ? the value of master offset is the accuracy value ? Regards, Hardik A Gohil On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Dale Smith <ds...@us...> wrote: > Offset and Delay are in nanoseconds. The Frequency is (I'm pretty > sure) in parts-per billion. > > -Dale > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Hardik Gohil <har...@gm...> > wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I am working on Linux 3.12 running on TI AM335x. > > > > The Test system is GPS connected to CPU over Ethernet and GPS is > configured > > to End to End protocol. > > > > following are the messages > > -------------------------------------- > > ptp4l[71468.231]: master offset -230 s2 freq -23449 path delay > > 15359 > > ptp4l[71469.232]: master offset -185 s2 freq -23473 path delay > > 15372 > > ptp4l[71470.233]: master offset 90 s2 freq -23254 path delay > > 15503 > > ptp4l[71471.234]: master offset -321 s2 freq -23638 path delay > > 15500 > > ptp4l[71472.234]: master offset 152 s2 freq -23261 path delay > > 15500 > > ptp4l[71473.235]: master offset 279 s2 freq -23088 path delay > > 15500 > > ptp4l[71474.237]: master offset -343 s2 freq -23627 path delay > > 15500 > > ptp4l[71475.242]: master offset 77 s2 freq -23310 path delay > > 15500 > > ptp4l[71476.242]: master offset 51 s2 freq -23313 path delay > > 15500 > > ptp4l[71477.242]: master offset 29 s2 freq -23319 path delay > > 15500 > > ----------------------------------------- > > phc2sys[71501.627]: sys offset -75 s2 freq -23336 delay 3480 > > phc2sys[71502.628]: sys offset 37 s2 freq -23246 delay 3521 > > phc2sys[71503.629]: sys offset 229 s2 freq -23043 delay 3480 > > phc2sys[71504.630]: sys offset -3 s2 freq -23207 delay 3560 > > phc2sys[71505.631]: sys offset -203 s2 freq -23408 delay 3520 > > phc2sys[71506.631]: sys offset -340 s2 freq -23605 delay 3440 > > phc2sys[71507.632]: sys offset -233 s2 freq -23600 delay 3560 > > phc2sys[71508.633]: sys offset -8 s2 freq -23445 delay 3480 > > phc2sys[71509.634]: sys offset 234 s2 freq -23206 delay 3521 > > phc2sys[71510.634]: sys offset 235 s2 freq -23135 delay 3560 > > phc2sys[71511.635]: sys offset 162 s2 freq -23137 delay 3520 > > phc2sys[71512.636]: sys offset 37 s2 freq -23213 delay 3520 > > phc2sys[71513.637]: sys offset -252 s2 freq -23491 delay 3560 > > phc2sys[71514.638]: sys offset -89 s2 freq -23404 delay 3560 > > phc2sys[71515.639]: sys offset 269 s2 freq -23073 delay 3480 > > ---------------------------------------------- > > > > I am trying to understand this messages. > > > > how do I know whether system time is synced to GPS and what is accuracy > ?? > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > Hardik A Gohil > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------ > > Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors > > Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms. > > With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE. > > Training and support from Colfax. > > Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi > > _______________________________________________ > > Linuxptp-users mailing list > > Lin...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-users > > > |
|
From: Hardik G. <har...@gm...> - 2017-01-23 01:58:29
|
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Richard Cochran <ric...@gm...> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 04:51:23PM +0800, Hardik Gohil wrote: > > both MAC means eth0 and eth1 you mean ? yes they are active. > > > active_slave = <0>; > > So is there a PTP peer device connected on slave 1 (probably =eth1) as > well? That would explain the messages, as the HW+driver only support > one active PTP port. > currently I am using eth0 as peer device. > > > I am using kernel version 3.12.30-AM335x-PD15.2.1 build using YOCTO by > > PHYTEC. > > I think vendor kernel. > > If the above hint doesn't explain your issue, then your next step is > to try a mainline linux kernel. > > > |
|
From: Richard C. <ric...@gm...> - 2017-01-23 05:33:43
|
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 09:58:22AM +0800, Hardik Gohil wrote: > currently I am using eth0 as peer device. And are you using dual_emac mode? Thanks, Richard |
|
From: Richard C. <ric...@gm...> - 2017-01-13 08:07:34
|
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 03:31:14PM +0800, Hardik Gohil wrote: > I would like to know the accuracy of time synchronization ? Then you need to measure it, using a PPS signal for example. > And the difference between path delay and master offset ? The path delay is the measured Ethernet propagation time between slave and master. > the value of master offset is the accuracy value ? No, the master offset is estimated instantaneous time difference between the slave and the master. HTH, Richard |
|
From: Hardik G. <har...@gm...> - 2017-01-13 08:20:17
|
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Richard Cochran <ric...@gm...> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 03:31:14PM +0800, Hardik Gohil wrote: > > I would like to know the accuracy of time synchronization ? > > you mean I need to generate PPS signal from CPU ? after that what should be next step ? basically my aim is to synchronize CPU system time to GPS using PTP. > Then you need to measure it, using a PPS signal for example. > > > And the difference between path delay and master offset ? > > The path delay is the measured Ethernet propagation time between slave > and master. > > > the value of master offset is the accuracy value ? > > No, the master offset is estimated instantaneous time difference > between the slave and the master. > > HTH, > Richard > > I have a message when I configure GPS to Peer-to-Peer ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp I cannot know what is happening |
|
From: Hardik G. <har...@gm...> - 2017-01-25 07:49:55
|
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Richard Cochran <ric...@gm...> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 09:58:22AM +0800, Hardik Gohil wrote: > > currently I am using eth0 as peer device. > > And are you using dual_emac mode? > yes using dual emac mode. sorry for late response. |
|
From: Richard C. <ric...@gm...> - 2017-01-25 08:38:55
|
On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 03:49:48PM +0800, Hardik Gohil wrote: > yes using dual emac mode. That explains it. I don't think dual emac and cpts will work together. At least I never tested it. > sorry for late response. No problem. Thanks, Richard |
|
From: Hardik G. <har...@gm...> - 2017-01-16 08:19:22
|
Hello, Can anybody help me to understand this message I have a message when I configure GPS to work PTP in Peer-to-Peer mode ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp Regards, Hardik A Gohil On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Hardik Gohil <har...@gm...> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Richard Cochran <ric...@gm... > > wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 03:31:14PM +0800, Hardik Gohil wrote: >> > I would like to know the accuracy of time synchronization ? >> >> you mean I need to generate PPS signal from CPU ? after that what should > be next step ? > > basically my aim is to synchronize CPU system time to GPS using PTP. > > >> Then you need to measure it, using a PPS signal for example. >> >> > And the difference between path delay and master offset ? >> >> The path delay is the measured Ethernet propagation time between slave >> and master. >> >> > the value of master offset is the accuracy value ? >> >> No, the master offset is estimated instantaneous time difference >> between the slave and the master. >> > >> HTH, >> Richard >> >> > I have a message when I configure GPS to Peer-to-Peer > > ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > > I cannot know what is happening > > |
|
From: Richard C. <ric...@gm...> - 2017-01-16 12:10:12
|
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 04:19:15PM +0800, Hardik Gohil wrote: > I have a message when I configure GPS to work PTP in Peer-to-Peer mode It is not enough to configure the master alone, you must also configure the slave in P2P mode. > ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp This means that the application received a PDelay_Req message, but the driver did not provide a HW time stamp. This error most likely indicates a driver or HW problem. The fact that you have three such messages all occurring within one millisecond of each other is suspicious. You should think about that and find out why this is happening. HTH, Richard |
|
From: Hardik G. <har...@gm...> - 2017-01-17 08:25:46
|
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 8:09 PM, Richard Cochran <ric...@gm...> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 04:19:15PM +0800, Hardik Gohil wrote: > > I have a message when I configure GPS to work PTP in Peer-to-Peer mode > > It is not enough to configure the master alone, you must also > configure the slave in P2P mode. > Yes I have done. ptp4l -i eth0 -m -A (The -A enables automatic selection of the delay measurement mechanism.) > > > ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > > ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > > ptp4l[18815.624]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > > This means that the application received a PDelay_Req message, but the > driver did not provide a HW time stamp. > > This error most likely indicates a driver or HW problem. > > The fact that you have three such messages all occurring within one > millisecond of each other is suspicious. You should think about that > and find out why this is happening. > sorry for my mistake I have copied and pasted same message three times. following are real time message ptp4l[2460.587]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp ptp4l[2461.589]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp ptp4l[2462.590]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp ptp4l[2463.590]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp ptp4l[2464.592]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp ptp4l[2465.594]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp ptp4l[2466.594]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp once I exit from application [ 2506.471859] cpts: unable to obtain a time stamp [ 2514.487888] cpts: event pool is empty HTH, > Richard > > > |
|
From: Richard C. <ric...@gm...> - 2017-01-17 11:00:08
|
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 04:25:39PM +0800, Hardik Gohil wrote: > sorry for my mistake I have copied and pasted same message three times. > following are real time message > > ptp4l[2460.587]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > ptp4l[2461.589]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > ptp4l[2462.590]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > ptp4l[2463.590]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > ptp4l[2464.592]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > ptp4l[2465.594]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > ptp4l[2466.594]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp > > once I exit from application > [ 2506.471859] cpts: unable to obtain a time stamp > [ 2514.487888] cpts: event pool is empty The driver (or HW) is not providing time stamps on these messages. Does your device have both MACs active? If so, check whether active_slave in the dts is correct. IIRC, the cpts does work with P2P. Which kernel version are you using? Is your kernel a mainline kernel, or a vendor kernel? Thanks, Richard |
|
From: Hardik G. <har...@gm...> - 2017-01-19 08:51:30
|
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Richard Cochran <ric...@gm...>
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 04:25:39PM +0800, Hardik Gohil wrote:
> > sorry for my mistake I have copied and pasted same message three times.
> > following are real time message
> >
> > ptp4l[2460.587]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp
> > ptp4l[2461.589]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp
> > ptp4l[2462.590]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp
> > ptp4l[2463.590]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp
> > ptp4l[2464.592]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp
> > ptp4l[2465.594]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp
> > ptp4l[2466.594]: port 1: received PDELAY_REQ without timestamp
> >
> > once I exit from application
> > [ 2506.471859] cpts: unable to obtain a time stamp
> > [ 2514.487888] cpts: event pool is empty
>
> The driver (or HW) is not providing time stamps on these messages.
>
> Does your device have both MACs active? If so, check whether
> active_slave in the dts is correct.
>
both MAC means eth0 and eth1 you mean ? yes they are active.
compatible = "ti,cpsw";
ti,hwmods = "cpgmac0";
clocks = <&cpsw_125mhz_gclk>, <&cpsw_cpts_rft_clk>;
clock-names = "fck", "cpts";
cpdma_channels = <8>;
ale_entries = <1024>;
bd_ram_size = <0x2000>;
no_bd_ram = <0>;
rx_descs = <64>;
mac_control = <0x20>;
slaves = <2>;
active_slave = <0>;
cpts_clock_mult = <0x80000000>;
cpts_clock_shift = <29>;
reg = <0x4a100000 0x800
0x4a101200 0x100>;
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <1
>
> IIRC, the cpts does work with P2P. Which kernel version are you
> using? Is your kernel a mainline kernel, or a vendor kernel?
>
I am using kernel version 3.12.30-AM335x-PD15.2.1 build using YOCTO by
PHYTEC.
I think vendor kernel.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
>
|
|
From: Richard C. <ric...@gm...> - 2017-01-22 15:43:07
|
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 04:51:23PM +0800, Hardik Gohil wrote: > both MAC means eth0 and eth1 you mean ? yes they are active. > active_slave = <0>; So is there a PTP peer device connected on slave 1 (probably =eth1) as well? That would explain the messages, as the HW+driver only support one active PTP port. > I am using kernel version 3.12.30-AM335x-PD15.2.1 build using YOCTO by > PHYTEC. > I think vendor kernel. If the above hint doesn't explain your issue, then your next step is to try a mainline linux kernel. Thanks, Richard |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X