Re: [Linuxptp-users] Is there any interface between ptp driver and linuxptp for controlling the ptp hardware?

[Takahiro S. <tsh...@gm...>]

Hello,

Thank you for the response.

However, if I set the station address as 0, I can not get the timestamp...
I will ask it to the EG20T hardware engineer.

Thanks and Best regards,
Takahiro Shimizu

2012/3/13 Richard Cochran <ric...@gm...>

> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 04:27:54PM +0900, Takahiro Shimizu wrote:
> > EG20T ieee1588 hardware needs destination MAC address to capture the ptp
> > message.
> > I implement it in ptp_pch_probe function now.
> > The usage is like below:
> > insmod ptp_pch.ko station="01:00:5e:00:01:81"
> > This is good if the MAC address is unicast. Because it is known already.
> > However it is NG if the MAC address is multicast. Because it is decided
> > when the linuxptp is started.
>
> Why do you need to set the station address?
>
> According to the EG20T Datasheet (Intel 3242111-006US), the station
> address fields are not used. In Table 617, page 523, "PTP Frame
> Identification", the MAC addresses are not used at all.
>
> Just leave the station address registers as zero.
>
> > So, I want to add the new command between ptp driver and linuxptp.
> > One possibility is to define the new ioctl of socket interface.
> > However it needs to change gbe, ptp driver and linuxptp.
> > Another possibility is to use the interface between ptp driver and
> linuxptp.
> > It seems simple.
> > However I can not see any direct interface between ptp driver and
> linuxptp.
> >
> > Question:
> > 1. Which is better to add the new command for ptp driver?
> > 2. Is it possible to add new interface between ptp driver and linuxptp
> > (e.g. ioctl)?
> > 3. Does anyone have other better idea?
>
> I don't see any need for such an interface.
>
> Richard
>