Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1549276
| From | Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. |
| Date | 2017-01-02 17:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sVdv3-YY-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <sOeFz-5aj-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <sV7fY-4MF-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <sV986-6ct-33@gated-at.bofh.it> <sVc5X-843-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, Jan 02, 2017 at 03:47:07PM +0100, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > Le 02/01/2017 à 12:31, Richard Cochran a écrit : > > This Cadence IP core is a complete disaster. > > Well, it evolved and propose several options to different SoC > integrators. This is not something unusual... > I suspect as well that some other network adapters have the same > weakness concerning PTP timestamp in single register as the early > revisions of this IP. It appears that this core can neither latch the time on read or write, or even latch time stamps. I have worked with many different PTP HW implementations, even early ones like on the ixp4xx, and it is no exaggeration to say that this one is uniquely broken. > I suspect that Rafal tend to jump too quickly to the latest IP revisions > and add more options to this series: let's not try to pour too much > things into this code right now. Why can't you check the IP version in the driver? And is it really true that the registers don't latch the time stamps, as Rafal said? If so, then we cannot accept the non-descriptor driver version, since it cannot possibly work correctly. Thanks, Richard
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Andrei Pistirica <andrei.pistirica@microchip.com> - 2016-12-14 11:10 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com> - 2016-12-28 09:20 +0100
RE: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Rafal Ozieblo <rafalo@cadence.com> - 2016-12-28 16:00 +0100
RE: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Rafal Ozieblo <rafalo@cadence.com> - 2017-01-02 10:40 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 12:40 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Harini Katakam <harinikatakamlinux@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 12:50 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 17:10 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> - 2017-01-02 15:50 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 17:20 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Harini Katakam <harinikatakamlinux@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 06:10 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 11:30 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 11:40 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Harini Katakam <harinikatakamlinux@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 12:00 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 12:20 +0100
RE: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Rafal Ozieblo <rafalo@cadence.com> - 2017-01-03 11:50 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM. Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> - 2017-01-03 15:30 +0100
csiph-web