Re: [Linuxptp-users] Configuration for boundary clock with on two-port NIC

[Andre P. <and...@sr...>]

Hi,

this morning I tried with the Mellanox OFED drivers v4.9-7.1.0 on Ubuntu 
20.04 LTS. This was the last version I could get the Mellanox drivers 
compiled. Result, however, is the same:

ptp4l[283.357]: selected /dev/ptp0 as PTP clock
ptp4l[283.408]: port 1 (enp1s0): INITIALIZING to LISTENING on INIT_COMPLETE
ptp4l[283.408]: port 0 (/var/run/ptp4l): INITIALIZING to LISTENING on 
INIT_COMPLETE
ptp4l[283.408]: port 0 (/var/run/ptp4lro): INITIALIZING to LISTENING on 
INIT_COMPLETE
ptp4l[283.505]: port 1 (enp1s0): new foreign master fcaf6a.fffe.02b447-1
ptp4l[283.758]: selected best master clock fcaf6a.fffe.02b447
ptp4l[283.758]: port 1 (enp1s0): LISTENING to UNCALIBRATED on RS_SLAVE
ptp4l[284.536]: port 1 (enp1s0): minimum delay request interval 2^-4
ptp4l[284.946]: port 1 (enp1s0): UNCALIBRATED to SLAVE on 
MASTER_CLOCK_SELECTED
ptp4l[285.508]: rms 23255986572 max 37976909340 freq +182135 +/- 122816 
delay -1439 +/- 1952
ptp4l[286.506]: rms 1677 max 6157 freq +267356 +/- 4283 delay   892 +/-  20
ptp4l[287.504]: rms 1590 max 6255 freq +268556 +/- 4011 delay   922 +/-   6
ptp4l[288.502]: rms  161 max  228 freq +268326 +/- 308 delay   936 +/-   7
ptp4l[289.500]: rms  208 max  231 freq +268746 +/-  29 delay   947 +/-   2
ptp4l[290.498]: rms 1570 max 6114 freq +268897 +/- 3989 delay   940 +/-  10
ptp4l[291.496]: rms   53 max   68 freq +268598 +/-  80 delay   944 +/-   3
ptp4l[292.502]: rms 1600 max 6172 freq +269013 +/- 4074 delay   947 +/-   4
ptp4l[293.507]: rms   99 max  235 freq +268431 +/- 173 delay   940 +/-   3
ptp4l[294.512]: rms   33 max   50 freq +268684 +/-  20 delay   946 +/-   2

Btw I am using a HP-branded MCX312B with FW version 2.42.5044


Thanks
Andre


On 19/11/23 22:07, Andre Puschmann wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> I've been able to get my hands on a ConnectX-3 Pro card and have done 
> some initial testing. The card indeed has a shared PHC for both ports so 
> running ptp4l as BC or TC does indeed work without the jbod option.
> 
> However, sync performance (i.e. rms values) for the downstream OCs isn't 
> great. And in fact, even the Mellanox as a OC isn't giving great results 
> - rms values jump a lot (and I've tried various PI value combinations).
> 
> Is anyone else seeing this with Mlx cards as well? Could it be my model 
> or the firmware?
> 
> Here is the output of a OC config with the card:
> 
> $ sudo /opt/linuxptp/ptp4l -i enp1s0 -f ~/configs/ptp/oc.cfg -m -l6
> ptp4l[12737.960]: selected /dev/ptp0 as PTP clock
> ptp4l[12738.012]: port 1 (enp1s0): INITIALIZING to LISTENING on 
> INIT_COMPLETE
> ptp4l[12738.012]: port 0 (/var/run/ptp4l): INITIALIZING to LISTENING on 
> INIT_COMPLETE
> ptp4l[12738.012]: port 0 (/var/run/ptp4lro): INITIALIZING to LISTENING 
> on INIT_COMPLETE
> ptp4l[12738.060]: port 1 (enp1s0): new foreign master fcaf6a.fffe.02b447-1
> ptp4l[12738.314]: selected best master clock fcaf6a.fffe.02b447
> ptp4l[12738.314]: port 1 (enp1s0): LISTENING to UNCALIBRATED on RS_SLAVE
> ptp4l[12740.148]: port 1 (enp1s0): minimum delay request interval 2^-4
> ptp4l[12740.512]: port 1 (enp1s0): UNCALIBRATED to SLAVE on 
> MASTER_CLOCK_SELECTED
> ptp4l[12741.138]: rms 1450 max 1934 freq +270168 +/- 1641 delay   951 
> +/-  14
> ptp4l[12742.139]: rms  129 max  179 freq +268843 +/- 296 delay   963 
> +/-  11
> ptp4l[12743.140]: rms  241 max  490 freq +268455 +/- 452 delay   948 
> +/-   1
> ptp4l[12744.141]: rms  135 max  180 freq +268381 +/-  25 delay   947 
> +/-   1
> ptp4l[12745.142]: rms 1357 max 5277 freq +269064 +/- 3459 delay   950 
> +/-   1
> ptp4l[12746.143]: rms 1397 max 5092 freq +268197 +/- 3539 delay   935 
> +/-   7
> ptp4l[12747.144]: rms  210 max  417 freq +268048 +/- 243 delay   942 
> +/-   3
> ptp4l[12748.145]: rms   15 max   32 freq +268415 +/-  29 delay   947 
> +/-   2
> ptp4l[12749.146]: rms 1430 max 5594 freq +269126 +/- 3617 delay   950 
> +/-   1
> ptp4l[12750.147]: rms 1391 max 5162 freq +268252 +/- 3543 delay   942 
> +/-   4
> 
> 
> Thanks
> Andre
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 2/11/23 17:37, Jacob Keller wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/2/2023 4:15 AM, Andre Puschmann wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 2/11/23 4:11, James Clark wrote:
>>>> I have a dual-port Mellanox ConnectX-3 (specifically MCX312A-XCBT),
>>>> which has a shared PHC. You can get them for less than $50 on
>>>> eBay/AliExpress. I had to upgrade the firmware on mine to get PTP
>>>> support. I haven't yet tried it as a boundary clock.
>>>
>>> Excellent. This is very helpful James. I've ordered a MCX312A and B and
>>> will compare both here. I'll share my results here soon. If you have a
>>> chance please also share the firmware version you're currently using on
>>> your NIC.
>>>
>>> With my Intel NIC I could get the BC config working but I needed to set
>>> the twoStepFlag to 1. Otherwise I was getting this for both ports:
>>>
>>> ptp4l[1040.180]: ioctl SIOCSHWTSTAMP failed: Numerical result out of 
>>> range
>>>
>>
>> Yep, that would indicate the device doesn't support one-step mode.
>>
>>> Sync quality wasn't great as expected though. I'll repeat with the
>>> Mellanox once I have them here.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Andre
>>>
>>
>> For Intel NICs, the only products I am aware of which share PHC across
>> the device are the E800 series devices. Prior devices (E500, and E700,
>> as well as the gigabit products) do share the same internal oscillator
>> but due to the register interface each function has to setup its own 
>> clock.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jake
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linuxptp-users mailing list
>> Lin...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-users
> 

-- 
Andre Puschmann

Software Radio Systems (SRS)
https://www.srs.io
an...@sr...

PGP/GnuPG key: 0x204A85DFEA324D58
fingerprint: 3924 1C60 D52E 81A2 1F2E 0C9D 204A 85DF EA32 4D58