Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 9 Dec 2022 15:54:36 +0100 | From | Horatiu Vultur <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v3 4/4] net: lan966x: Add ptp trap rules |
| |
The 12/09/2022 15:23, Michael Walle wrote: > > Am 2022-12-09 15:20, schrieb Horatiu Vultur: > > The 12/09/2022 15:05, Michael Walle wrote: > > > > > > Am 2022-12-09 13:56, schrieb Vladimir Oltean: > > > > On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 01:58:57PM +0100, Horatiu Vultur wrote: > > > > > > Does it also work out of the box with the following patch if > > > > > > the interface is part of a bridge or do you still have to do > > > > > > the tc magic from above? > > > > > > > > > > You will still need to enable the TCAM using the tc command to have it > > > > > working when the interface is part of the bridge. > > > > > > > > FWIW, with ocelot (same VCAP mechanism), PTP traps work out of the box, > > > > no need to use tc. Same goes for ocelot-8021q, which also uses the > > > > VCAP. > > > > I wouldn't consider forcing the user to add any tc command in order for > > > > packet timestamping to work properly. > > > > On ocelot, the vcap is enabled at port initialization, while on other > > platforms(lan966x and sparx5) you have the option to enable or disable. > > > > > > > > +1 > > > Esp. because there is no warning. I.e. I tried this patch while > > > the interface was added on a bridge and there was no error > > > whatsoever. > > > > What error/warning were you expecting to see here? > > Scrap that. ptp4l is reporting an error in case the device is part > of a bridge: > Jan 1 02:33:04 buildroot user.info syslog: [9184.261] driver rejected > most general HWTSTAMP filter > > Nevertheless, from a users POV I'd just expect it to work. How > would I know what I need to do here?
What about a warning in the driver? Say that the vcap needs to be enabled.
> > -michael
-- /Horatiu
| |