Re: [Linuxptp-users] Need help debugging failed clock synchronization

[John H. <jhu...@no...>]

On 03/22/2016 03:35 PM, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> On Wed, 2016-03-16 at 13:45 -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
>> On 03/16/2016 12:54 PM, Richard Cochran wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:20:35AM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
>>>> After changing the 'time_stamping' option in /etc/ptp4l.conf from
>>>> hardware to software and restarting ptp4l I now see much better
>>>> behavior.
>>> Yes, but probably you are disappointed having to forego the HW
>>> synchronization performance.  At least this test shows that your
>>> card
>>> most likely has a HW bug.
>> If possible it would be really nice to get the HW time-stamping
>> working
>> on this system.  I can move to another system if needed but getting
>> this
>> working would help me in the short term.  (No expansion ports or I'd
>> just pick up another NIC.  On a related note do you or anyone else
>> on
>> the list know how well the Intel X540 (10Gb NIC using the ixgbe
>> driver)
>> is supported WRT ptp4l?
>>
> The X540 device should be supported WRT ptp4l, and as far as I know it
> works quite well. I am sorry for the troubles the e1000e adapter is
> causing. It is most likely a driver issue. I am not 100% sure who is
> responsible for that driver now, but I will attempt to determine if the
> latest errata have been released on SourceForge yet. (It can be slow
> sometimes)

Thanks for the info about the x540.  Please let me know if a newer 
driver for the 82574L ends up on SF.

-- 
-john

To be or not to be, that is the question
                 2b || !2b
(0b10)*(0b1100010) || !(0b10)*(0b1100010)
         0b11000100 || !0b11000100
         0b11000100 ||  0b00111011
                0b11111111
255, that is the answer.