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

[Richard C. <ric...@gm...>]

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 08:48:10AM +0900, Takahiro Shimizu wrote:
> HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L4_EVENT  SA = 01:00:5e:00:01:81 (E2E mechanism only)
> HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L2_EVENT  SA = 01:1b:19:00:00:00 (E2E mechanism only)
> HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_EVENT     The same as HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L4_EVENT
> 
> I want that the user uses linuptp and EG20T driver by default.
> It seems that the current linuxptp does not use SA = 01:1b:19:00:00:00 by
> default.
> If so, I want to implement like the above.
> It is the limitation of the EG20T ptp driver.

Yes, I agree. This makes sense as a workaround for testing.
But I think we should do the following to be correct.

driver:

  switch (rx_filter) {
  case HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_EVENT:
      return ERANGE;
  case HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L4_EVENT:
      SA = 01:00:5e:00:01:81;
  case HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L2_EVENT:
      SA = 01:1b:19:00:00:00;
  }

  Also, the driver's Kconfig needs a statment that the hardware only
  supports the end-to-end mechanism and that the peer-to-peer
  mechanism is not supported.

ptp4l:

  try (HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_EVENT);
  if (errno == ERANGE) {
      if (transport_is_L2)
          try (HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L2_EVENT);
      else
          try (HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L4_EVENT);
  }

I will work on the ptp4l code. Can you please fix the driver?

BTW David Miller already applied your first driver patches. So, you
should submit any changes as patches on top of that.

Thanks,
Richard