Re: [Linuxptp-devel] unknown option ntpshm_segment at line 8 in eno1 section

[Gary E. M. <ge...@re...>]

Yo Miroslav!

On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 11:47:43 +0200
Miroslav Lichvar <mli...@re...> wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 02, 2015 at 02:58:34AM +0000, Gary E. Miller wrote:
> > > is the same as entering
> > > 
> > >     ptp4l -i eno1 -i eno2
> > 
> > Sadly, no.  When you do that ptp4l only uses one SHM, not two.  Now
> > if ptp4l read the [eno1] and [eno2] sections it would work.
> 
> There is one ptp4l instance (and configuration file) for one PTP or
> system clock, which may have one or more ports. How could one ptp4l
> fill more that one SHM segment if it has only one clock?

I agree, I only tried it because someone on this list asked me to try it.

> > >  Another possibility is
> > >     ptp4l -f -
> > > together with a HERE file in your shell script.
> > 
> > Yeah, but then both instances try to grab ports 319 and 320.
> 
> Hm, why is that a problem? The sockets are bound with the
> SO_BINDTODEVICE socket option.

I'm not sure on the exact details, but I get an error message when the 2nd
ptp4l starts and the 2nd instance is non-functional.

> You can even run multiple ptp4l instances in different PTP domains on
> the same NIC (only one using HW timestamping).

Assuming I could get HW timestamping to work.  Trying on many hosts
with a few deffferent NIC types the HW timestamping is still non-functional
for me.  Works for a short while, then goes bizarro.

You can search this list archive for the gory details...

> The timemaster program can do that for you.

I wish.

> > I tried
> > putting one instance on UDPv4 and one UDPv6, but the UDPv6 seems to
> > also grab the UDPv4 port.
> 
> I don't see that happening here.

Interesting, can you share your setup?

RGDS
GARY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmington Ave., Suite E, Bend, OR 97703
	ge...@re...  Tel:+1(541)382-8588