Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

gPTP: remove accelerated SYNC send on startup. See discussion in #465. #486

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 28, 2016

Conversation

andrew-elder
Copy link

Completely remove accelerated sync on gPTP daemon startup. I think I have covered everything - comments welcomed.

@andrew-elder
Copy link
Author

I'm hoping @christopher-s-hall can take a quick look at this. I not 100% sure I have implemented his suggestion as discussed in issue #465. Let me know and I'll make the required/suggested changes. Anyone else have any comments?

Copy link
Contributor

@pinealservo pinealservo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It looks good to me, although it might introduce a slight change to the timing of the Sync interval. Since the automotive code path already had this change, and I didn't notice any misbehavior with it in my testing, I'm guessing it's not significant.

else {
// Automotive Profile
syncDone();
syncDone();

Copy link
Contributor

@pinealservo pinealservo Sep 23, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The previous code subtracted the old wait_time from the new wait_time; as far as I can tell this sets the wait interval from the beginning of the Sync interval rather than from the point we've finished waiting for the hardware to give us a TX Timestamp for our first Sync.

I'm not sure whether you left this out intentionally to simplify things or if you missed it. I'm not sure if it makes much difference correctness-wise.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I did see the wait time adjustment math. I concluded it was most relevant to the automotive fast sync case where TX timestamp read time might have a large effect percentage wise on the Sync interval timing. I didn't think removing the adjustment would have any negative operational effect - although I must admit I haven't hooked up test equipment to try to figure out if there is an such effect.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It looks fine. I'm not too worried about the interval adjustment at this point.

@pinealservo
Copy link
Contributor

Any comment @christopher-s-hall, or anyone else? We need another reviewer on this.

@pinealservo
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks, @christopher-s-hall

@pinealservo pinealservo merged commit 8c3351f into Avnu:open-avb-next Sep 28, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants